<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Slyons</id>
	<title>Soma-notes - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Slyons"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Slyons"/>
	<updated>2026-04-22T11:05:06Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.42.1</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=9105</id>
		<title>Category:2011-O&amp;C</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=9105"/>
		<updated>2011-04-05T16:31:24Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==****Changes to be viewed (delete once acknowledged by group)****==&lt;br /&gt;
(TK) - I have provided a summary of key concepts that will help with the idea of resource allocation across the network under the summary for &#039;&#039;&#039;Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;(&amp;lt;--Scott can you link this directly to the summary...I have no idea how to)&#039;&#039; We can go more in depth with the concepts that catch your eyes. The paper is beautifully written and easy to understand&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Report Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dc5r38d8_2hfmsggfx&amp;amp;interval=60 Group presentation]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Abstract&lt;br /&gt;
*Introduction&lt;br /&gt;
**Observability on a Network&lt;br /&gt;
*Automatic Contracts (System-to-System)&lt;br /&gt;
**What Can be Contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
**Determining When to Initiate a Contract&lt;br /&gt;
**States of a Contract&lt;br /&gt;
*Quantifiable Uniform Observation and Reporting of Unmanned Mediation (QUORUM)&lt;br /&gt;
**System Overview&lt;br /&gt;
***Roles in the QUORUM&lt;br /&gt;
***Gossip and Reputation&lt;br /&gt;
****QUORUM Cliques&lt;br /&gt;
***Validating a Contract, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the QUORUM	&lt;br /&gt;
****Private Contracts&lt;br /&gt;
*Alternatives/Other Approaches to QUORUM&lt;br /&gt;
*The Future of QUORUM&lt;br /&gt;
*Conclusion&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Focus==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As we&#039;ve discussed these topics we&#039;ve decided that the focus of our report will be on *Contracts* and the Observation of their fulfillment. We are also under the assumption that participants are uniquely and universally identifiable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=9104</id>
		<title>Category:2011-O&amp;C</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=9104"/>
		<updated>2011-04-05T16:30:53Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dc5r38d8_2hfmsggfx&amp;amp;interval=60 Group presentation]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==****Changes to be viewed (delete once acknowledged by group)****==&lt;br /&gt;
(TK) - I have provided a summary of key concepts that will help with the idea of resource allocation across the network under the summary for &#039;&#039;&#039;Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility&#039;&#039;&#039; &#039;&#039;(&amp;lt;--Scott can you link this directly to the summary...I have no idea how to)&#039;&#039; We can go more in depth with the concepts that catch your eyes. The paper is beautifully written and easy to understand&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Report Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Abstract&lt;br /&gt;
*Introduction&lt;br /&gt;
**Observability on a Network&lt;br /&gt;
*Automatic Contracts (System-to-System)&lt;br /&gt;
**What Can be Contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
**Determining When to Initiate a Contract&lt;br /&gt;
**States of a Contract&lt;br /&gt;
*Quantifiable Uniform Observation and Reporting of Unmanned Mediation (QUORUM)&lt;br /&gt;
**System Overview&lt;br /&gt;
***Roles in the QUORUM&lt;br /&gt;
***Gossip and Reputation&lt;br /&gt;
****QUORUM Cliques&lt;br /&gt;
***Validating a Contract, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the QUORUM	&lt;br /&gt;
****Private Contracts&lt;br /&gt;
*Alternatives/Other Approaches to QUORUM&lt;br /&gt;
*The Future of QUORUM&lt;br /&gt;
*Conclusion&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Focus==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As we&#039;ve discussed these topics we&#039;ve decided that the focus of our report will be on *Contracts* and the Observation of their fulfillment. We are also under the assumption that participants are uniquely and universally identifiable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observation_Quorum&amp;diff=9018</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observation Quorum</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observation_Quorum&amp;diff=9018"/>
		<updated>2011-03-31T18:06:52Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Random other things that need more detail==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Contract Witnesses&lt;br /&gt;
* Signed observations&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Quorum.png]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8995</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8995"/>
		<updated>2011-03-29T18:01:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (TK) Essentially who determines whether a contract is fulfilled or not? Should there not be some sort of tracking system to determine whether the requirements of the contracts are completed and once they are the contract is &amp;quot;closed&amp;quot;...&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Might have to defer to Justice here...&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
* (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Should there be more of a feedback system than COMPLETE/INCOMPLETE?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Does every contract have to be about the exchange of quantifiable &amp;quot;goods&amp;quot;?&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) Computer are &amp;quot;citizens&amp;quot; of the &amp;quot;vitual&amp;quot; world. As such contracts are from computer to computer, not person to person. Think about it is a purely resource sharing contracts which are automatically done by computers based on their &amp;quot;individual&amp;quot; needs.&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Quorum/Contracting system:&lt;br /&gt;
** Announcing identities&lt;br /&gt;
** Announce contracts between entities&lt;br /&gt;
** Gossip system for capability sharing&lt;br /&gt;
** RFP System&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) The metrics or requirements of the contract observed by other nodes in system are subject to an error of margin&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Contract_timeline.png]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8993</id>
		<title>Category:2011-O&amp;C</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8993"/>
		<updated>2011-03-29T17:27:50Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Focus */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Focus==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As we&#039;ve discussed these topics we&#039;ve decided that the focus of our report will be on *Contracts* and the Observation of their fulfillment. We are also under the assumption that participants are uniquely and universally identifiable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8992</id>
		<title>Category:2011-O&amp;C</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8992"/>
		<updated>2011-03-29T17:26:30Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Problem Outline */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Focus==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As we&#039;ve discussed these topics we&#039;ve decided that the focus of our report will be on *Contracts* and the Observation of their fulfillment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=File:Contract_timeline.png&amp;diff=8991</id>
		<title>File:Contract timeline.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=File:Contract_timeline.png&amp;diff=8991"/>
		<updated>2011-03-29T17:24:17Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8990</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8990"/>
		<updated>2011-03-29T17:24:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (TK) Essentially who determines whether a contract is fulfilled or not? Should there not be some sort of tracking system to determine whether the requirements of the contracts are completed and once they are the contract is &amp;quot;closed&amp;quot;...&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Might have to defer to Justice here...&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
* (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Should there be more of a feedback system than COMPLETE/INCOMPLETE?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Does every contract have to be about the exchange of quantifiable &amp;quot;goods&amp;quot;?&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) Computer are &amp;quot;citizens&amp;quot; of the &amp;quot;vitual&amp;quot; world. As such contracts are from computer to computer, not person to person. Think about it is a purely resource sharing contracts which are automatically done by computers based on their &amp;quot;individual&amp;quot; needs.&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Quorum/Contracting system:&lt;br /&gt;
** Announcing identities&lt;br /&gt;
** Announce contracts between entities&lt;br /&gt;
** Gossip system for capability sharing&lt;br /&gt;
** RFP System&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Contract_timeline.png]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=File:Quorum.png&amp;diff=8989</id>
		<title>File:Quorum.png</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=File:Quorum.png&amp;diff=8989"/>
		<updated>2011-03-29T17:23:23Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observation_Quorum&amp;diff=8988</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observation Quorum</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observation_Quorum&amp;diff=8988"/>
		<updated>2011-03-29T17:23:03Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Quorum.png]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8685</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8685"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T18:10:32Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (TK) Essentially who determines whether a contract is fulfilled or not? Should there not be some sort of tracking system to determine whether the requirements of the contracts are completed and once they are the contract is &amp;quot;closed&amp;quot;...&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Might have to defer to Justice here...&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
* (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Should there be more of a feedback system than COMPLETE/INCOMPLETE?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Does every contract have to be about the exchange of quantifiable &amp;quot;goods&amp;quot;?&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) Computer are &amp;quot;citizens&amp;quot; of the &amp;quot;vitual&amp;quot; world. As such contracts are from computer to computer, not person to person. Think about it is a purely resource sharing contracts which are automatically done by computers based on their &amp;quot;individual&amp;quot; needs.&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Quorum/Contracting system:&lt;br /&gt;
** Announcing identities&lt;br /&gt;
** Announce contracts between entities&lt;br /&gt;
** Gossip system for capability sharing&lt;br /&gt;
** RFP System&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8683</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8683"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T18:10:02Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (TK) Essentially who determines whether a contract is fulfilled or not? Should there not be some sort of tracking system to determine whether the requirements of the contracts are completed and once they are the contract is &amp;quot;closed&amp;quot;...&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Might have to defer to Justice here...&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
* (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Should there be more of a feedback system than COMPLETE/INCOMPLETE?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Does every contract have to be about the exchange of quantifiable &amp;quot;goods&amp;quot;?&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) Computer are &amp;quot;citizens&amp;quot; of the &amp;quot;vitual&amp;quot; world. As such contracts are from computer to computer, not person to person. Think about it is a purely resource sharing contracts which are automatically done by computers based on their &amp;quot;individual&amp;quot; needs.&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Quorum system:&lt;br /&gt;
** Announcing identities&lt;br /&gt;
** Announce contracts between entities&lt;br /&gt;
** Gossip system for capability sharing&lt;br /&gt;
** RFP System&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8661</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8661"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:39:09Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (TK) Essentially who determines whether a contract is fulfilled or not? Should there not be some sort of tracking system to determine whether the requirements of the contracts are completed and once they are the contract is &amp;quot;closed&amp;quot;...&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Might have to defer to Justice here...&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
* (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Should there be more of a feedback system than COMPLETE/INCOMPLETE?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Does every contract have to be about the exchange of quantifiable &amp;quot;goods&amp;quot;?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8656</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Observability</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8656"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:32:31Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Awareness */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;* (TK) How can we observe the information that we, our computer or ourselves, provide the &amp;quot;network&amp;quot; or public is not going to be maliciously used?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) One point that was discussed in class was the idea of a digital fingerprint. Is this really feasible? and how would it work?&lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) One way is to minimize what information you give away, or at least &#039;be aware&#039; of what you are giving away. However, observability is not limited to just information that we send out. We are also looking for ways to observe contracts being fulfilled.  &lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) Also besides the fingerprinting, there is no guarantee that once your information goes to a party that you want with any fingerprint mechanism or security measure, once they have it decrypted, you can&#039;t (assuming they are not caught) stop them from passing the information on. &lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) What is and is not feasibly observable?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) What kinds of observations are there? Are we strictly talking about observations without any humans involved at all?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
We might be able to divide Observability into two subsections:&lt;br /&gt;
= Awareness =&lt;br /&gt;
Awareness is *context* for information. Meta-information.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Analogy ==&lt;br /&gt;
Like going to a website and knowing not only about your visit, but who else is there, etc.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Assurance =&lt;br /&gt;
Assurance is far more related to contracts, and is pretty self-explanatory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8646</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Observability</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8646"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:23:34Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;* (TK) How can we observe the information that we, our computer or ourselves, provide the &amp;quot;network&amp;quot; or public is not going to be maliciously used?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) One point that was discussed in class was the idea of a digital fingerprint. Is this really feasible? and how would it work?&lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) One way is to minimize what information you give away, or at least &#039;be aware&#039; of what you are giving away. However, observability is not limited to just information that we send out. We are also looking for ways to observe contracts being fulfilled.  &lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) Also besides the fingerprinting, there is no guarantee that once your information goes to a party that you want with any fingerprint mechanism or security measure, once they have it decrypted, you can&#039;t (assuming they are not caught) stop them from passing the information on. &lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) What is and is not feasibly observable?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) What kinds of observations are there? Are we strictly talking about observations without any humans involved at all?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
We might be able to divide Observability into two subsections:&lt;br /&gt;
= Awareness =&lt;br /&gt;
Awareness is *context* for information. Not just knowing something, but knowing something and the environment in which it was created.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
= Assurance =&lt;br /&gt;
Assurance is far more related to contracts, and is pretty self-explanatory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8644</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Observability</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8644"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:17:50Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;* (TK) How can we observe the information that we, our computer or ourselves, provide the &amp;quot;network&amp;quot; or public is not going to be maliciously used?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) One point that was discussed in class was the idea of a digital fingerprint. Is this really feasible? and how would it work?&lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) One way is to minimize what information you give away, or at least &#039;be aware&#039; of what you are giving away. However, observability is not limited to just information that we send out. We are also looking for ways to observe contracts being fulfilled.  &lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) Also besides the fingerprinting, there is no guarantee that once your information goes to a party that you want with any fingerprint mechanism or security measure, once they have it decrypted, you can&#039;t (assuming they are not caught) stop them from passing the information on. &lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) What is and is not feasibly observable?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) What kinds of observations are there? Are we strictly talking about observations without any humans involved at all?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8643</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8643"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:14:39Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Should there be more of a feedback system than COMPLETE/INCOMPLETE?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Does every contract have to be about the exchange of quantifiable &amp;quot;goods&amp;quot;?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8642</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8642"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:11:37Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) Should there be more of a feedback system than COMPLETE/INCOMPLETE?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8640</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8640"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:09:36Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* (TK) When I think of contracts, I think of:&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is responsible for the terms and agreements&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who is made aware of the agreement? Is it broadcast to everyone or only a select few people?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) who/what is the governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
*** (SL) Does there even need to be a governing body?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) the first step should be to find a way to verify the different parties involved in the contract.&lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) What mechanism can be provided to enforce contracts?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8639</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Observability</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8639"/>
		<updated>2011-03-17T17:07:55Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;* (TK) How can we observe the information that we, our computer or ourselves, provide the &amp;quot;network&amp;quot; or public is not going to be maliciously used?&lt;br /&gt;
** (TK) One point that was discussed in class was the idea of a digital fingerprint. Is this really feasible? and how would it work?&lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) One way is to minimize what information you give away, or at least &#039;be aware&#039; of what you are giving away. However, observability is not limited to just information that we send out. We are also looking for ways to observe contracts being fulfilled.  &lt;br /&gt;
** (HS) Also besides the fingerprinting, there is no guarantee that once your information goes to a party that you want with any fingerprint mechanism or security measure, once they have it decrypted, you can&#039;t (assuming they are not caught) stop them from passing the information on. &lt;br /&gt;
* (SL) What is and is not feasibly observable?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8583</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8583"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T18:09:46Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: Redirected page to Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;#REDIRECT [[:Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category_talk:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8582</id>
		<title>Category talk:2011-O&amp;C</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category_talk:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8582"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T18:08:33Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: Created page with &amp;quot;==Papers==  ===Observability===  * How do we define &amp;#039;public&amp;#039; action? How do we monitor &amp;#039;public&amp;#039; action without monitoring every action? * How can you make sure your agent is acti…&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Papers==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Observability===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Contract Monitoring ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Monitoring Service Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45705-4_15 An Agent-Based Framework for Monitoring Service Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Helmut Kneer, Henrik Stormer, Harald Häuschen and Burkhard Stiller, 2002&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Within the past few years, the variety of real-time multimedia streaming services on the Internet has grown steadily. Performance of streaming services is very sensitive to traffic congestion and results very often in poor service quality on today’s best effort Internet. Reasons include the lack of any traffic prioritization mechanisms on the network level and its dependence on the cooperation of several Internet Service Providers and their reliable transmission of data packets. Therefore, service differentiation and its reliable delivery must be enforced on a business level through the introduction of service contracts between service providers and their customers. However, compliance with such service contracts is the crucial point that decides about successful improvement of the service delivery process. For that reason, an agent-based monitoring framework has been developed and introduced enabling the use of mobile agents to monitor compliance with contractual agreements between service providers and service customers. This framework describes the setup and the functionality of different kinds of mobile agents that allow monitoring of service contracts across domains of multiple service providers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Contracts===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== AURIC ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
TJ&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Bandwidth ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Claimed by Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Dynamic Adaptation ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
TJ&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
TJ&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Claimed by Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ==== &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Hadi&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Trustworthiness of New Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_12 Determining the Trustworthiness of New Electronic Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Paul Groth, Simon Miles, Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Yolanda Gil, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Expressing contractual agreements electronically potentially allows agents to automatically perform functions surrounding contract use: establishment, fulfilment, renegotiation etc. For such automation to be used for real business concerns, there needs to be a high level of trust in the agent-based system. While there has been much research on simulating trust between agents, there are areas where such trust is harder to establish. In particular, contract proposals may come from parties that an agent has had no prior interaction with and, in competitive business-to-business environments, little reputation information may be available. In human practice, trust in a proposed contract is determined in part from the content of the proposal itself, and the similarity of the content to that of prior contracts, executed to varying degrees of success. In this paper, we argue that such analysis is also appropriate in automated systems, and to provide it we need systems to record salient details of prior contract use and algorithms for assessing proposals on their content. We use provenance technology to provide the former and detail algorithms for measuring contract success and similarity for the latter, applying them to an aerospace case study.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Web Privacy with P3P ==== &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/webprivp3p/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This book talks about P3P and how companies and web developers can comply with p3p.&lt;br /&gt;
Also check http://www.w3.org/P3P/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Hadi&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Increasing Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Like we discussed on Thursday, the real question when looking at observability is whether an action can be viewed, and who can view it. In the real world, you have a chance of being observed no matter what you do; the Internet, on the other hand, reduces this observability and instead offers a modicum of anonymity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As the possibility of being observed increases, behavior adjusts to encourage the positive reputation of the actor or to conform with laws and regulations. This is the main benefit we wish to obtain by increasing the observability of digital actions. While omnipresent observation is possible on a computer network, in terms of observing contracts it might be more efficient to impose the possibility of being observed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===A Possible System for Increasing Observability of Contracts and Actions?===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Test ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
hello!&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8581</id>
		<title>Category:2011-O&amp;C</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-O%26C&amp;diff=8581"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T18:08:00Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: Created page with &amp;quot;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.  ==Problem Outline==  * How do we define &amp;#039;public&amp;#039; action? How do we monitor &amp;#039;public&amp;#039; action w…&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8570</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8570"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:57:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8569</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Observability</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Observability&amp;diff=8569"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:56:55Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: Created page with &amp;quot;Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8567</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8567"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:56:24Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-O&amp;amp;C]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8566</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8566"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:56:12Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-OC]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_OC_Bandwidth&amp;diff=8565</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W OC Bandwidth</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_OC_Bandwidth&amp;diff=8565"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:55:23Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: Created page with &amp;quot;     Category:2011-Contracts&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8563</id>
		<title>Category:2011-Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Category:2011-Contracts&amp;diff=8563"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:45:54Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: Created page with &amp;quot;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;This is the category page for things regarding contracts&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8561</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8561"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:43:33Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8560</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8560"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:42:33Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8559</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8559"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:42:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[:Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8558</id>
		<title>DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8558"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:40:02Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Please note that the majority of our efforts are contained on the &amp;quot;Discussion&amp;quot; page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Problem Outline==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* How do I observe the acts of other agents, particularly public acts?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can contracts be made between computers/agents?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that contracts are being upheld?&lt;br /&gt;
* What side effects does observance have? For example if everyone can see who buys something online, would that promote or demote using such website?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-Observability]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:2011-Contracts]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Members==&lt;br /&gt;
* Seyyed Hadi Sajjadpour&lt;br /&gt;
* Tarjit Komal&lt;br /&gt;
* Scott Lyons&lt;br /&gt;
* Andrew Luczak&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8552</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8552"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:36:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Papers==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Observability===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Contract Monitoring ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Monitoring Service Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45705-4_15 An Agent-Based Framework for Monitoring Service Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Helmut Kneer, Henrik Stormer, Harald Häuschen and Burkhard Stiller, 2002&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Within the past few years, the variety of real-time multimedia streaming services on the Internet has grown steadily. Performance of streaming services is very sensitive to traffic congestion and results very often in poor service quality on today’s best effort Internet. Reasons include the lack of any traffic prioritization mechanisms on the network level and its dependence on the cooperation of several Internet Service Providers and their reliable transmission of data packets. Therefore, service differentiation and its reliable delivery must be enforced on a business level through the introduction of service contracts between service providers and their customers. However, compliance with such service contracts is the crucial point that decides about successful improvement of the service delivery process. For that reason, an agent-based monitoring framework has been developed and introduced enabling the use of mobile agents to monitor compliance with contractual agreements between service providers and service customers. This framework describes the setup and the functionality of different kinds of mobile agents that allow monitoring of service contracts across domains of multiple service providers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Contracts===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== AURIC ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Bandwidth ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Claimed by Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Dynamic Adaptation ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
TJ&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
TJ&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Claimed by Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ==== &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Trustworthiness of New Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_12 Determining the Trustworthiness of New Electronic Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Paul Groth, Simon Miles, Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Yolanda Gil, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Expressing contractual agreements electronically potentially allows agents to automatically perform functions surrounding contract use: establishment, fulfilment, renegotiation etc. For such automation to be used for real business concerns, there needs to be a high level of trust in the agent-based system. While there has been much research on simulating trust between agents, there are areas where such trust is harder to establish. In particular, contract proposals may come from parties that an agent has had no prior interaction with and, in competitive business-to-business environments, little reputation information may be available. In human practice, trust in a proposed contract is determined in part from the content of the proposal itself, and the similarity of the content to that of prior contracts, executed to varying degrees of success. In this paper, we argue that such analysis is also appropriate in automated systems, and to provide it we need systems to record salient details of prior contract use and algorithms for assessing proposals on their content. We use provenance technology to provide the former and detail algorithms for measuring contract success and similarity for the latter, applying them to an aerospace case study.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Web Privacy with P3P ==== &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/webprivp3p/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This book talks about P3P and how companies and web developers can comply with p3p.&lt;br /&gt;
Also check http://www.w3.org/P3P/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Increasing Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Like we discussed on Thursday, the real question when looking at observability is whether an action can be viewed, and who can view it. In the real world, you have a chance of being observed no matter what you do; the Internet, on the other hand, reduces this observability and instead offers a modicum of anonymity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As the possibility of being observed increases, behavior adjusts to encourage the positive reputation of the actor or to conform with laws and regulations. This is the main benefit we wish to obtain by increasing the observability of digital actions. While omnipresent observation is possible on a computer network, in terms of observing contracts it might be more efficient to impose the possibility of being observed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===A Possible System for Increasing Observability of Contracts and Actions?===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8547</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8547"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:29:40Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* AURIC */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Papers==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Observability===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Contract Monitoring ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Monitoring Service Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45705-4_15 An Agent-Based Framework for Monitoring Service Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Helmut Kneer, Henrik Stormer, Harald Häuschen and Burkhard Stiller, 2002&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Within the past few years, the variety of real-time multimedia streaming services on the Internet has grown steadily. Performance of streaming services is very sensitive to traffic congestion and results very often in poor service quality on today’s best effort Internet. Reasons include the lack of any traffic prioritization mechanisms on the network level and its dependence on the cooperation of several Internet Service Providers and their reliable transmission of data packets. Therefore, service differentiation and its reliable delivery must be enforced on a business level through the introduction of service contracts between service providers and their customers. However, compliance with such service contracts is the crucial point that decides about successful improvement of the service delivery process. For that reason, an agent-based monitoring framework has been developed and introduced enabling the use of mobile agents to monitor compliance with contractual agreements between service providers and service customers. This framework describes the setup and the functionality of different kinds of mobile agents that allow monitoring of service contracts across domains of multiple service providers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Contracts===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== AURIC ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Claimed by Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Bandwidth ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Dynamic Adaptation ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Claimed by Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Trustworthiness of New Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_12 Determining the Trustworthiness of New Electronic Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Paul Groth, Simon Miles, Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Yolanda Gil, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Expressing contractual agreements electronically potentially allows agents to automatically perform functions surrounding contract use: establishment, fulfilment, renegotiation etc. For such automation to be used for real business concerns, there needs to be a high level of trust in the agent-based system. While there has been much research on simulating trust between agents, there are areas where such trust is harder to establish. In particular, contract proposals may come from parties that an agent has had no prior interaction with and, in competitive business-to-business environments, little reputation information may be available. In human practice, trust in a proposed contract is determined in part from the content of the proposal itself, and the similarity of the content to that of prior contracts, executed to varying degrees of success. In this paper, we argue that such analysis is also appropriate in automated systems, and to provide it we need systems to record salient details of prior contract use and algorithms for assessing proposals on their content. We use provenance technology to provide the former and detail algorithms for measuring contract success and similarity for the latter, applying them to an aerospace case study.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Web Privacy with P3P ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/webprivp3p/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This book talks about P3P and how companies and web developers can comply with p3p.&lt;br /&gt;
Also check http://www.w3.org/P3P/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
M.Culnan, R. Biles, Journal of Social Issues &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-4560.00067/full&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Check link for abstract, couldn&#039;t copy paste! This paper talks about government regulation, industry self-regulation and technological solutions with regards to the internet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Increasing Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Like we discussed on Thursday, the real question when looking at observability is whether an action can be viewed, and who can view it. In the real world, you have a chance of being observed no matter what you do; the Internet, on the other hand, reduces this observability and instead offers a modicum of anonymity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As the possibility of being observed increases, behavior adjusts to encourage the positive reputation of the actor or to conform with laws and regulations. This is the main benefit we wish to obtain by increasing the observability of digital actions. While omnipresent observation is possible on a computer network, in terms of observing contracts it might be more efficient to impose the possibility of being observed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===A Possible System for Increasing Observability of Contracts and Actions?===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8544</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8544"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:27:37Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Papers==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Observability===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Contract Monitoring ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Monitoring Service Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45705-4_15 An Agent-Based Framework for Monitoring Service Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Helmut Kneer, Henrik Stormer, Harald Häuschen and Burkhard Stiller, 2002&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Within the past few years, the variety of real-time multimedia streaming services on the Internet has grown steadily. Performance of streaming services is very sensitive to traffic congestion and results very often in poor service quality on today’s best effort Internet. Reasons include the lack of any traffic prioritization mechanisms on the network level and its dependence on the cooperation of several Internet Service Providers and their reliable transmission of data packets. Therefore, service differentiation and its reliable delivery must be enforced on a business level through the introduction of service contracts between service providers and their customers. However, compliance with such service contracts is the crucial point that decides about successful improvement of the service delivery process. For that reason, an agent-based monitoring framework has been developed and introduced enabling the use of mobile agents to monitor compliance with contractual agreements between service providers and service customers. This framework describes the setup and the functionality of different kinds of mobile agents that allow monitoring of service contracts across domains of multiple service providers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Contracts===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== AURIC ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Bandwidth ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Dynamic Adaptation ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Claimed by Scott&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Trustworthiness of New Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_12 Determining the Trustworthiness of New Electronic Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Paul Groth, Simon Miles, Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Yolanda Gil, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Expressing contractual agreements electronically potentially allows agents to automatically perform functions surrounding contract use: establishment, fulfilment, renegotiation etc. For such automation to be used for real business concerns, there needs to be a high level of trust in the agent-based system. While there has been much research on simulating trust between agents, there are areas where such trust is harder to establish. In particular, contract proposals may come from parties that an agent has had no prior interaction with and, in competitive business-to-business environments, little reputation information may be available. In human practice, trust in a proposed contract is determined in part from the content of the proposal itself, and the similarity of the content to that of prior contracts, executed to varying degrees of success. In this paper, we argue that such analysis is also appropriate in automated systems, and to provide it we need systems to record salient details of prior contract use and algorithms for assessing proposals on their content. We use provenance technology to provide the former and detail algorithms for measuring contract success and similarity for the latter, applying them to an aerospace case study.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Summary =====&lt;br /&gt;
Andrew&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Web Privacy with P3P ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/webprivp3p/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This book talks about P3P and how companies and web developers can comply with p3p.&lt;br /&gt;
Also check http://www.w3.org/P3P/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
M.Culnan, R. Biles, Journal of Social Issues &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-4560.00067/full&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Check link for abstract, couldn&#039;t copy paste! This paper talks about government regulation, industry self-regulation and technological solutions with regards to the internet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Increasing Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Like we discussed on Thursday, the real question when looking at observability is whether an action can be viewed, and who can view it. In the real world, you have a chance of being observed no matter what you do; the Internet, on the other hand, reduces this observability and instead offers a modicum of anonymity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As the possibility of being observed increases, behavior adjusts to encourage the positive reputation of the actor or to conform with laws and regulations. This is the main benefit we wish to obtain by increasing the observability of digital actions. While omnipresent observation is possible on a computer network, in terms of observing contracts it might be more efficient to impose the possibility of being observed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===A Possible System for Increasing Observability of Contracts and Actions?===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8542</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8542"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:17:49Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Papers==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Observability===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Contract Monitoring ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Monitoring Service Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45705-4_15 An Agent-Based Framework for Monitoring Service Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Helmut Kneer, Henrik Stormer, Harald Häuschen and Burkhard Stiller, 2002&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Within the past few years, the variety of real-time multimedia streaming services on the Internet has grown steadily. Performance of streaming services is very sensitive to traffic congestion and results very often in poor service quality on today’s best effort Internet. Reasons include the lack of any traffic prioritization mechanisms on the network level and its dependence on the cooperation of several Internet Service Providers and their reliable transmission of data packets. Therefore, service differentiation and its reliable delivery must be enforced on a business level through the introduction of service contracts between service providers and their customers. However, compliance with such service contracts is the crucial point that decides about successful improvement of the service delivery process. For that reason, an agent-based monitoring framework has been developed and introduced enabling the use of mobile agents to monitor compliance with contractual agreements between service providers and service customers. This framework describes the setup and the functionality of different kinds of mobile agents that allow monitoring of service contracts across domains of multiple service providers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Contracts===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== AURIC ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Bandwidth ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Dynamic Adaptation ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ====&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Trustworthiness of New Contracts ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_12 Determining the Trustworthiness of New Electronic Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Paul Groth, Simon Miles, Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Yolanda Gil, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Expressing contractual agreements electronically potentially allows agents to automatically perform functions surrounding contract use: establishment, fulfilment, renegotiation etc. For such automation to be used for real business concerns, there needs to be a high level of trust in the agent-based system. While there has been much research on simulating trust between agents, there are areas where such trust is harder to establish. In particular, contract proposals may come from parties that an agent has had no prior interaction with and, in competitive business-to-business environments, little reputation information may be available. In human practice, trust in a proposed contract is determined in part from the content of the proposal itself, and the similarity of the content to that of prior contracts, executed to varying degrees of success. In this paper, we argue that such analysis is also appropriate in automated systems, and to provide it we need systems to record salient details of prior contract use and algorithms for assessing proposals on their content. We use provenance technology to provide the former and detail algorithms for measuring contract success and similarity for the latter, applying them to an aerospace case study.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Web Privacy with P3P ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/webprivp3p/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This book talks about P3P and how companies and web developers can comply with p3p.&lt;br /&gt;
Also check http://www.w3.org/P3P/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
M.Culnan, R. Biles, Journal of Social Issues &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-4560.00067/full&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Check link for abstract, couldn&#039;t copy paste! This paper talks about government regulation, industry self-regulation and technological solutions with regards to the internet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Increasing Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Like we discussed on Thursday, the real question when looking at observability is whether an action can be viewed, and who can view it. In the real world, you have a chance of being observed no matter what you do; the Internet, on the other hand, reduces this observability and instead offers a modicum of anonymity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As the possibility of being observed increases, behavior adjusts to encourage the positive reputation of the actor or to conform with laws and regulations. This is the main benefit we wish to obtain by increasing the observability of digital actions. While omnipresent observation is possible on a computer network, in terms of observing contracts it might be more efficient to impose the possibility of being observed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===A Possible System for Increasing Observability of Contracts and Actions?===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8541</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8541"/>
		<updated>2011-03-15T17:15:12Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Papers */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Papers==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Observability===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Contract Monitoring ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===== Abstract =====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Monitoring Service Contracts ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45705-4_15 An Agent-Based Framework for Monitoring Service Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Helmut Kneer, Henrik Stormer, Harald Häuschen and Burkhard Stiller, 2002&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Within the past few years, the variety of real-time multimedia streaming services on the Internet has grown steadily. Performance of streaming services is very sensitive to traffic congestion and results very often in poor service quality on today’s best effort Internet. Reasons include the lack of any traffic prioritization mechanisms on the network level and its dependence on the cooperation of several Internet Service Providers and their reliable transmission of data packets. Therefore, service differentiation and its reliable delivery must be enforced on a business level through the introduction of service contracts between service providers and their customers. However, compliance with such service contracts is the crucial point that decides about successful improvement of the service delivery process. For that reason, an agent-based monitoring framework has been developed and introduced enabling the use of mobile agents to monitor compliance with contractual agreements between service providers and service customers. This framework describes the setup and the functionality of different kinds of mobile agents that allow monitoring of service contracts across domains of multiple service providers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Contracts===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== AURIC ===&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bandwidth ===&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Dynamic Adaptation ===&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ===&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ===&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Trustworthiness of New Contracts ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_12 Determining the Trustworthiness of New Electronic Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Paul Groth, Simon Miles, Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Yolanda Gil, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Expressing contractual agreements electronically potentially allows agents to automatically perform functions surrounding contract use: establishment, fulfilment, renegotiation etc. For such automation to be used for real business concerns, there needs to be a high level of trust in the agent-based system. While there has been much research on simulating trust between agents, there are areas where such trust is harder to establish. In particular, contract proposals may come from parties that an agent has had no prior interaction with and, in competitive business-to-business environments, little reputation information may be available. In human practice, trust in a proposed contract is determined in part from the content of the proposal itself, and the similarity of the content to that of prior contracts, executed to varying degrees of success. In this paper, we argue that such analysis is also appropriate in automated systems, and to provide it we need systems to record salient details of prior contract use and algorithms for assessing proposals on their content. We use provenance technology to provide the former and detail algorithms for measuring contract success and similarity for the latter, applying them to an aerospace case study.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Web Privacy with P3P ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/webprivp3p/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This book talks about P3P and how companies and web developers can comply with p3p.&lt;br /&gt;
Also check http://www.w3.org/P3P/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
M.Culnan, R. Biles, Journal of Social Issues &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-4560.00067/full&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Abstract ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Check link for abstract, couldn&#039;t copy paste! This paper talks about government regulation, industry self-regulation and technological solutions with regards to the internet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Increasing Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Like we discussed on Thursday, the real question when looking at observability is whether an action can be viewed, and who can view it. In the real world, you have a chance of being observed no matter what you do; the Internet, on the other hand, reduces this observability and instead offers a modicum of anonymity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As the possibility of being observed increases, behavior adjusts to encourage the positive reputation of the actor or to conform with laws and regulations. This is the main benefit we wish to obtain by increasing the observability of digital actions. While omnipresent observation is possible on a computer network, in terms of observing contracts it might be more efficient to impose the possibility of being observed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===A Possible System for Increasing Observability of Contracts and Actions?===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In class on Thursday, Scott brought up the idea of tracking a contract by making a minimal set of details available to all (i.e., everyone knows the parties involved in the contract, and whether the contract was fulfilled). Taking this a little further, our group considered the existence of an anonymous, distributed quorum of observers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This quorum would, upon the creation of a contract, be given a summary of the contract (for example, Company A has agreed to cache data for Company B on a given day, while Company B will reciprocate the following day). Over the term of the contract, the individual systems in the quorum would test the contract to see if the terms had been met. At the end of the contract period, the systems would provide a &amp;quot;vote&amp;quot; declaring whether they witnessed the contract being fulfilled.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This system could also be extended to monitor general actions. Consider again this set of observers, however, now they connect at random to various websites, and take a snapshot of all connections to it. At any given time, no other user knows which system the observers will be monitoring. In other words, the observers are analogous to police patrols, albeit with no set patrol route.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8402</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8402"/>
		<updated>2011-03-10T18:52:25Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Observability */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
* What &#039;&#039;&#039;CAN&#039;&#039;&#039; be observed?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Contract Monitoring ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Monitoring Service Contracts ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45705-4_15 An Agent-Based Framework for Monitoring Service Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Helmut Kneer, Henrik Stormer, Harald Häuschen and Burkhard Stiller, 2002&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Within the past few years, the variety of real-time multimedia streaming services on the Internet has grown steadily. Performance of streaming services is very sensitive to traffic congestion and results very often in poor service quality on today’s best effort Internet. Reasons include the lack of any traffic prioritization mechanisms on the network level and its dependence on the cooperation of several Internet Service Providers and their reliable transmission of data packets. Therefore, service differentiation and its reliable delivery must be enforced on a business level through the introduction of service contracts between service providers and their customers. However, compliance with such service contracts is the crucial point that decides about successful improvement of the service delivery process. For that reason, an agent-based monitoring framework has been developed and introduced enabling the use of mobile agents to monitor compliance with contractual agreements between service providers and service customers. This framework describes the setup and the functionality of different kinds of mobile agents that allow monitoring of service contracts across domains of multiple service providers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contracts==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== AURIC ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Bandwidth ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Dynamic Adaptation ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstact ===&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Trustworthiness of New Contracts ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_12 Determining the Trustworthiness of New Electronic Contracts] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Paul Groth, Simon Miles, Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Yolanda Gil, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Expressing contractual agreements electronically potentially allows agents to automatically perform functions surrounding contract use: establishment, fulfilment, renegotiation etc. For such automation to be used for real business concerns, there needs to be a high level of trust in the agent-based system. While there has been much research on simulating trust between agents, there are areas where such trust is harder to establish. In particular, contract proposals may come from parties that an agent has had no prior interaction with and, in competitive business-to-business environments, little reputation information may be available. In human practice, trust in a proposed contract is determined in part from the content of the proposal itself, and the similarity of the content to that of prior contracts, executed to varying degrees of success. In this paper, we argue that such analysis is also appropriate in automated systems, and to provide it we need systems to record salient details of prior contract use and algorithms for assessing proposals on their content. We use provenance technology to provide the former and detail algorithms for measuring contract success and similarity for the latter, applying them to an aerospace case study.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Web Privacy with P3P ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/webprivp3p/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This book talks about P3P and how companies and web developers can comply with p3p.&lt;br /&gt;
Also check http://www.w3.org/P3P/&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
M.Culnan, R. Biles, Journal of Social Issues &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-4560.00067/full&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Check link for abstract, couldn&#039;t copy paste! This paper talks about government regulation, industry self-regulation and technological solutions with regards to the internet.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8248</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8248"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T18:29:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Observability */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Contract Monitoring ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03668-2_29 Contract Monitoring in Agent-Based Systems: Case Study] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Jiří Hodík, Jiří Vokřínek and Michal Jakob, 2009&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Monitoring of fulfilment of obligations defined by electronic contracts in distributed domains is presented in this paper. A two-level model of contract-based systems and the types of observations needed for contract monitoring are introduced. The observations (inter-agent communication and agents’ actions) are collected and processed by the contract observation and analysis pipeline. The presented approach has been utilized in a multi-agent system for electronic contracting in a modular certification testing domain.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contracts==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== AURIC ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Bandwidth ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Dynamic Adaptation ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.127.8674&amp;amp;rep=rep1&amp;amp;type=pdf Heuristics for Enforcing Service Level Agreements in a Public Computing Utility] A masters thesis paper by Balasubramaneyam Maniymaran.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
With the increasing popularity of consumer and research oriented wide-area applications,there arises a need for a robust and efﬁcient wide-area resource management system. Even though there exists number of systems for wide area resource management, they fail to couple the QoS management with cost management, which is the key issue in pushing such a system to be commercially successful. Further, the lack of IT skills within the companies arouses the need of decoupling service management from the underlying complex wide-area resource management. A public computing utility (PCU) addresses both these issues, and, in addition, it creates a market place for the selling idling computing resources. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This work proposes a PCU model addressing the above mentioned issues and develops heuristics to enforce QoS in that model. A new concept called virtual clusters (VCs) is introduced as semi-dynamic, service speciﬁc resource partitions of a PCU, optimizing cost, QoS, and resource utilization. This thesis describes the methodology of VC creation, analyses the formulation of a VC creation into an optimization problem, and develops solution heuristics. The concept of VC is supported by two other concepts introduced here namely anchor point (AP) and overload partition (OLP). The concept of AP is used to represent the demand distribution in a network that assists the problem formulation of the VC creation and SLA management. The concept of overload partition is used to handle the demand spikes in a VC.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a PCU, the VC management is implemented in two phases: the ﬁrst is an off-line phase of creating a VC that selects the appropriate resources and allocates them for the particular service; and the second phase employs on-line scheduling heuristic to distribute the jobs/requests from the APs among the VC nodes to achieve load balancing. A detailed simulation study is conducted to analyze the performance of different VC conﬁgurations for different load conditions and scheduling schemes and this performance is compared with a fully dynamic resource allocation scheme called Service Grid. The results verify the novelty of the VC concept.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Service Level Agreement in Cloud Computing ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://knoesis.wright.edu/library/download/OOPSLA_cloud_wsla_v3.pdf SLAs in Cloud Computing] A paper written by Pankesh Patel, Ajith Ranabahu, Amit Sheth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstact ===&lt;br /&gt;
Cloud computing that provides cheap and pay-as-you-go computing resources is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to traditional IT Infrastructure. As more and more consumers delegate their tasks to cloud providers, Service Level Agreements(SLA) between consumers and providers emerge as a key aspect. Due to the dynamic nature of the cloud, continuous monitoring on Quality of Service (QoS)attributes is necessary to enforce SLAs. Also numerous other factors such as trust (on the cloud provider) come into consideration, particularly for enterprise customers that may outsource its critical data. This complex nature of the cloud landscape warrants a sophisticated means of managing SLAs. This paper proposes a mechanism for managing SLAs in a cloud computing environment using the Web Service Level Agreement(WSLA) framework, developed for SLA monitoring and SLA enforcement in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). We use the third party support feature of WSLA to delegate monitoring and enforcement tasks to other entities in order to solve the trust issues. We also present a real world use case to validate our proposal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Service Level Agreements on IP Networks ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By Dinesh C. Verma, IBM T. J Watson Research center&lt;br /&gt;
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1323286&amp;amp;tag=1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Abstract: This paper provides an overview of service-level agreements in IP networks. It looks at the typical components of a service-level agreement, and identifies three common approaches that are used to satisfy service level agreements in IP networks. The implications of using the approaches in the context of a network service provider, a hosting service provider, and an enterprise are examined. While most providers currently offer a static insurance approach towards supporting service level agreements, the schemes that can lead to more dynamic approaches are identified.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8215</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8215"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:37:48Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contracts==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== AURIC ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Bandwidth ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Dynamic Adaptation ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_28 Context-Driven Autonomic Adaptation of SLA] from Lecture notes in Computer Science, by authors Caroline Herssens, Stéphane Faulkner and Ivan Jureta, 2008.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are used in Service-Oriented Computing to define the obligations of the parties involved in a transaction. SLAs define the service users’ Quality of Service (QoS) requirements that the service provider should satisfy. Requirements defined once may not be satisfiable when the context of the web services changes (e.g., when requirements or resource availability changes). Changes in the context can make SLAs obsolete, making SLA revision necessary. We propose a method to autonomously monitor the services’ context, and adapt SLAs to avoid obsolescence thereof.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8214</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8214"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:33:15Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contracts==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== AURIC ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Bandwidth ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30189-9_19 SLA-Driven Flexible Bandwidth Reservation Negotiation Schemes for QoS Aware IP Networks] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science by Gerard Parr and Alan Marshall, 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
We present a generic Service Level Agreement (SLA)-driven service provisioning architecture, which enables dynamic and flexible bandwidth reservation schemes on a per- user or a per-application basis. Various session level SLA negotiation schemes involving bandwidth allocation, service start time and service duration parameters are introduced and analysed. The results show that these negotiation schemes can be utilised for the benefits of both end user and network provide such as getting the highest individual SLA optimisation in terms of Quality of Service (QoS) and price. A prototype based on an industrial agent platform has also been built to demonstrate the negotiation scenario and this is presented and discussed.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8213</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8213"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:30:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* AURIC */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contracts==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== AURIC ==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8211</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8211"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:30:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* AURIC */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contracts==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== AURIC ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework]] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8210</id>
		<title>Talk:DistOS-2011W Observability &amp; Contracts</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:DistOS-2011W_Observability_%26_Contracts&amp;diff=8210"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:29:49Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: /* Contracts */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Observability==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* How do we define &#039;public&#039; action? How do we monitor &#039;public&#039; action without monitoring every action?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you make sure your agent is acting according to your instructions?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can we ensure that information we receive through a third-party is legitimate?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Contracts==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* What can or can&#039;t be contracted?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can you quantify abstract resources?&lt;br /&gt;
* How can two or more parties agree with a minimum of intervention?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some forms of contracts exist in the form of Service Level Agreements, and there have been efforts made to automate this process:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== AURIC ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75694-1_21 | AURIC: A Scalable and Highly Reusable SLA Compliance Auditing Framework]] from Lecture Notes in Computer Science, by Hasan and Burkhard Stiller, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Abstract ===&lt;br /&gt;
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are needed to allow business interactions to rely on Internet services. Service Level Objectives (SLO) specify the committed performance level of a service. Thus, SLA compliance auditing aims at verifying these commitments. Since SLOs for various application services and end-to-end performance definitions vary largely, automated auditing of SLA compliances poses the challenge to an auditing framework. Moreover, end-to-end performance data are potentially large for a provider with many customers. Therefore, this paper presents a scalable and highly reusable auditing framework and a prototype, termed AURIC (Auditing Framework for Internet Services), whose components can be distributed across different domains.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Rp/doc&amp;diff=8209</id>
		<title>Template:Rp/doc</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Rp/doc&amp;diff=8209"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:22:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: 1 revision&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;{{Documentation subpage}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- PLEASE ADD CATEGORIES AND INTERWIKIS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Function==&lt;br /&gt;
Use this template when you are referring to specific pages within a cited source many times in the same article.  The following example sentence shows the formatting produced by&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;aardvark&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;... details of cited source ...&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;{{rp|23}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
which would be used to refer to a fact on page 23 of reference [1]:&lt;br /&gt;
:Apples should be eaten when they are ripe.&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;aardvark&amp;quot;&amp;gt;A. A. Aardvark (1999). &#039;&#039;The Best Moments for Eating&#039;&#039;. Green Press.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;{{rp|23}}&lt;br /&gt;
This second example sentence shows the formatting produced by&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;aardvark&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;{{rp|56}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
which would be used as citation for a statement supported by a fact on page 56 of the same reference [1], which will appear only once in the list of references:&lt;br /&gt;
:Porridge, usually eaten for breakfast, can also serve as a dessert.&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;aardvark&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;{{rp|56}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Usage==&lt;br /&gt;
===With colon===&lt;br /&gt;
{{tlx|rp|page number(s)}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Page number(s)&amp;quot; can be a single page number (287), several (xii, 287, 292, 418) or a range (287–88) or any combination thereof.  Do not add &amp;quot;Page&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;pp.&amp;quot;, etc.{{mdash}} just the numbers.  Of course, it can also be used for non-numeric pages, for example: &amp;quot;f. 29&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;A7&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;back cover&amp;quot;, etc., and can also be used for non-paginated sources, e.g., &amp;quot;0:35:12&amp;quot; for a video source.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This template (the name of which stands for &amp;quot;reference pages&amp;quot;) is for appending page numbers in [[WP:HARV|Harvard referencing]] style (or [[AMA style]]&amp;lt;!--HELP! Is there some alt. term for AMA style? It is a redlink!--&amp;gt;, as an option &amp;amp;ndash; &#039;&#039;see &amp;quot;[[#With parentheses|With parentheses]]&amp;quot;, below&#039;&#039;) to [[WP:FN|Cite.php-generated inline reference citations]].  It is a solution for the problem of an article with a source that must be cited many, many times, at numerous different pages. It is an alternative to the more common method of using [[WP:CITESHORT|shortened footnotes]], that does not require the reader to follow two links to see the source. The Cite.php &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; footnoting system is desired to be used instead of the incredibly tedious and easy-to-break {{tl|ref label}} and {{tl|note label}} system (tedious and fragile in &#039;&#039;this&#039;&#039; context; the templates are not terribly difficult to use and are quite useful in other situations).  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The problem of course is that a work cited 100+ times with page numbers in each appearance, with individual &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&#039;s will result in more than 100 lines generated for the same source by &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;references&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; (or {{tl|Reflist}}),&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;&amp;amp;#91;[[#note1|*note]]&amp;amp;#93;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; while using a single &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;gt;...&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; and followup &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&#039;s with the same &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;name=&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; and simply mentioning all of the pages cited, in the single line generated by &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;references&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; could result in at least 100 pages being specifically cited in a single reference citation footnote, rendering it basically unreadable and certainly useless.  Given that [[WP:FA|Featured Article]] and sometimes even [[WP:GA|Good Article]] review generally insist upon specific facts being cited with specific page numbers, Cite.php&#039;s limitations are in fact a severe problem for editors.  Even more importantly, either of the two results above is a severe problem for encyclopedia readers.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This template solves this problem (perhaps temporarily, as Cite.php may be upgraded at some future date to account for this problem, in which case a bot can be created to convert {{tl|Rp}} instances to the new, improved &amp;quot;Super-&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&amp;quot;).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;{{Anchor|note1}}*&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; Note: &#039;&#039;See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Delaware_Basin&amp;amp;oldid=328167809#References this diff] for a short but already reader-annoying example. Imagine it with 100+ citations to one source instead of just 13.&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====Example====&lt;br /&gt;
The example below shows {{tl|Rp}} in use both at a first occurrence [&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;gt;...&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;], with other references and inline superscript templates present so one can see how it looks when used in series, and at a later [&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;] occurrence.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
;Code:&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;An asserted fact.&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;Clarifyme|date={{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;ref name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;Cite book&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|last=Jackson&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|first=Jennifer&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|title=The Unlightable Being of Bareness&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|publisher=Funky Publications|location=&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;[[&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;San Francisco, CA]]&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|year=1999&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|isbn=1-2345-6789-0&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
}}&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;rp|233&amp;amp;ndash;7}}&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;ref name=&amp;quot;Smith2000&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;Cite book&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|last=Smith&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|first=Bob&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|title=Another Source&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|publisher=Another Publisher&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|location=&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;[[&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;Chicago, IL]]&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|year=2000&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|isbn=0-0986-5432-1&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|page=27&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
}}&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;ref name=&amp;quot;NYT20060120&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;Cite news&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|url= &amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;http://url.goes.here.tld/&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt; &amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|title=Some Article&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|last=Jones&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|first=Bill&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|work=New York Times&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|page=S4, &amp;quot;Style&amp;quot; section&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|publisher=&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;[[&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;New York Times Company]]&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|location=&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;[[&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;New York, NY]]&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|date=January 20, 2006&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|accessdate=2007-03-17&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
}}&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;Another asserted fact.&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;{{rp|27, 422}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{Reflist}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
;Results:&lt;br /&gt;
An asserted fact.&amp;lt;sup title=&amp;quot;The text in the vicinity of this tag needs clarification or removal of jargon.&amp;quot; class=&amp;quot;noprint&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&amp;amp;#91;[[Wikipedia:Please clarify|&#039;&#039;clarify&#039;&#039;]]&amp;amp;#93;&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;gt;{{Cite book|last=Jackson|first=Jennifer|title=The Unlightable Being of Bareness|publisher=Funky Publications|location=[[San Francisco, CA]]|year=1999|isbn=1-2345-6789-0}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;{{rp|233&amp;amp;ndash;7}}&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;Smith2000&amp;quot;&amp;gt;{{Cite book|last=Smith|first=Bob|title=Another Source|publisher=Another Publisher|location=[[Chicago, IL]]|year=2000|isbn=0-0986-5432-1|page=27}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;NYT20060120&amp;quot;&amp;gt;{{Cite news|url= http://url.goes.here.tld/ |title=Some Article|last=Jones|first=Bill|work=New York Times|page=S4, &amp;quot;Style&amp;quot; section|publisher=[[New York Times Company]]|location=[[New York, NY]]|date=January 20, 2006|accessdate=2007-03-17}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Another asserted fact.&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;{{rp|27, 422}}&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
{{Reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===With parentheses===&lt;br /&gt;
AMA style puts superscripted page numbers inside parenthesis instead of after a colon.  For editors that prefer this style, this template has parameters &#039;&#039;page&#039;&#039;, &#039;&#039;pages&#039;&#039;, and &#039;&#039;at&#039;&#039;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
;Code:&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;An asserted fact.&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;ref name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;Cite book&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|last=Jackson&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|first=Jennifer&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|title=The Unlightable Being of Bareness&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|publisher=Funky Publications|location=&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;[[&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;San Francisco, CA]]&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|year=1999&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
|isbn=1-2345-6789-0&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
}}&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;rp|page=148}}&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;Another asserted fact.&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;{{rp|pages=233&amp;amp;ndash;7}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;A third asserted fact.&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;{{rp|at=dust jacket}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{Reflist}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
;Results:&lt;br /&gt;
An asserted fact.&amp;lt;ref group=&amp;quot;a&amp;quot; name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;gt;{{Cite book|last=Jackson|first=Jennifer|title=The Unlightable Being of Bareness|publisher=Funky Publications|location=[[San Francisco, CA]]|year=1999|isbn=1-2345-6789-0}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;{{rp|page=148}}&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Another asserted fact.&amp;lt;ref group=&amp;quot;a&amp;quot; name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;{{rp|pages=233&amp;amp;ndash;7}}&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
A third asserted fact.&amp;lt;ref group=&amp;quot;a&amp;quot; name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;{{rp|at=dust jacket}}&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
{{Reflist|group=&amp;quot;a&amp;quot;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Missing page numbers===&lt;br /&gt;
If a reference needs a page number but it is missing, use &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;{{tlx|rp|needed&amp;amp;#61;y|&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{subst:DATE}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;}}&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; or &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;{{tlx|rp|needed&amp;amp;#61;y|date&amp;amp;#61;{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}}}&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;. This will automatically use the {{tlx|page needed}} template to add the article to [[:Category:Wikipedia articles needing page number citations|the appropriate category]]. For example, &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref group=&amp;quot;b&amp;quot; name=&amp;quot;Jackson 1999 ex. 1&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;{{tlx|rp|needed&amp;amp;#61;y|&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{subst:DATE}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;}}&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; results in: &amp;lt;ref group=&amp;quot;b&amp;quot; name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;gt;{{Cite book|last=Jackson|first=Jennifer|title=The Unlightable Being of Bareness|publisher=Funky Publications|location=[[San Francisco, CA]]|year=1999|isbn=1-2345-6789-0}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;{{fix&lt;br /&gt;
|link=Wikipedia:Citing sources&lt;br /&gt;
|text=page&amp;amp;nbsp;needed}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This is preferable to something like &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;{{tlx|rp|page number?}}&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; or &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;{{tlx|rp|?}}&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt;, since the cleanup categorization takes place. It is preferable to simply using {{tlx|page needed}} in articles that make use of {{tlx|rp}}, since it preserves the use of the {{tlx|rp}} syntax.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Do not nest the {{tlx|page needed}} template inside the {{tlx|rp}} template, or the results are too small to be legible for many readers, and with a stray colon: &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref group=&amp;quot;b&amp;quot; name=&amp;quot;Jackson 1999&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;{{tlx|rp|{{tlx|page needed|&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{subst:DATE}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;}}&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; results in: &amp;lt;ref group=&amp;quot;b&amp;quot; name=&amp;quot;Jackson1999&amp;quot;&amp;gt;{{Cite book|last=Jackson|first=Jennifer|title=The Unlightable Being of Bareness|publisher=Funky Publications|location=[[San Francisco, CA]]|year=1999|isbn=1-2345-6789-0}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;{{rp|{{fix&lt;br /&gt;
|link=Wikipedia:Citing sources&lt;br /&gt;
|text=page&amp;amp;nbsp;needed}}}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{Reflist|group=&amp;quot;b&amp;quot;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Warning===&lt;br /&gt;
This template should not be used unless necessary.  In the vast majority of cases, citing page numbers in the &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;amp;nbsp;...&amp;gt;...&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; code is just fine.  This template is only intended for sources that are used many, many times in the same article, to such an extent that normal citation would produce a useless line in &amp;lt;code&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;references&amp;amp;nbsp;/&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/code&amp;gt; or too many individual ones.  Overuse of this template will make prose harder to read, and is likely to be reverted by other editors. Used judiciously, however, it is much less interruptive to the visual flow than [[Wikipedia:Harvard referencing|full Harvard referencing]] and some other reference citation styles.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See also==&lt;br /&gt;
* [[w:WP:CITESHORT|Shortened footnotes]] in [[w:Wikipedia:Citing sources]], which describes the most common way of citing multiple pages of the same source.&lt;br /&gt;
* {{tl|w:sfn}}, a template that implements the most common way of citing multiple pages of the same source.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;includeonly&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- CATEGORIES AND INTERWIKIS HERE, THANKS --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Citation templates]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Inline templates]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[de:Vorlage:Rp]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[en:Template:Rp]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[ja:Template:Rp]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[ko:틀:Rp]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[pl:Szablon:Rp]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[ru:Шаблон:rp]]&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/includeonly&amp;gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Cite_news&amp;diff=8207</id>
		<title>Template:Cite news</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Cite_news&amp;diff=8207"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:22:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: 1 revision&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;#REDIRECT [[Template:Cite journal]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Anchor&amp;diff=8205</id>
		<title>Template:Anchor</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Anchor&amp;diff=8205"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:22:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: 1 revision&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&amp;lt;span id=&amp;quot;{{{anchor|{{{1|anchor}}}}}}&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&amp;lt;noinclude&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
{{Documentation}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/noinclude&amp;gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Reflist/doc&amp;diff=8203</id>
		<title>Template:Reflist/doc</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Reflist/doc&amp;diff=8203"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:22:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: 1 revision&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&amp;lt;noinclude&amp;gt;{{documentation subpage}}&amp;lt;/noinclude&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- EDIT TEMPLATE DOCUMENTATION BELOW THIS LINE --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Usage ==&lt;br /&gt;
Use this template to create a reference list in an article. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If used with no parameters, it will simply produce a reference list in a small font.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Multiple columns ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Using &amp;lt;tt&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{reflist|2}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/tt&amp;gt; will create a two-column reference list, and &amp;lt;tt&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{reflist|3}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/tt&amp;gt; will create a three-column list.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Using &amp;lt;tt&amp;gt;&amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/tt&amp;gt; will allow the browser to automatically choose the number of columns based on the width of the web browser.  Choose a column width that&#039;s appropriate for the average width of the references on the page.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Note: multiple columns currently render properly only in [[Mozilla Firefox]],&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{cite web|accessdate=2006-11-24|date=[[2005-12-30]]|title=CSS3 Multi-Column Thriller|url=http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/css3_multi-column_thriller.html}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; though the feature is included in [[Cascading Style Sheets|CSS3]], so it should work for a larger number of browsers in the future.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{cite web|url=http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-multicol|title=CSS3 module: Multi-column layout|publisher=[[World Wide Web Consortium|W3C]]|date=[[2005-12-15]]|accessdate=2006-11-24}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Three options for usage ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Option 1 (only specific references) - see [[w:The Rule]] ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Content ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Source name, access date, etc.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Source name, access date, etc.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Option 2 (only general references) - see [[w:National Publications]] ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Content ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{refbegin}}&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 1&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 2&lt;br /&gt;
{{refend}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==== Option 3 (both specific and general references) - see [[w:Elephant]] ====&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Content ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Source name, access date, etc.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Source name, access date, etc.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{refbegin}}&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 1&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 2&lt;br /&gt;
{{refend}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
* [[w:Wikipedia:Citing sources]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[w:Wikipedia:Footnotes]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Templates recommended for use with Reflist&lt;br /&gt;
** {{tl|Refbegin}}&lt;br /&gt;
** {{tl|Refend}}&lt;br /&gt;
* Similar-functioning templates&lt;br /&gt;
** {{tl|Footnotes}}&lt;br /&gt;
** {{tl|FootnotesSmall}}&lt;br /&gt;
** {{tl|Ref-section}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;includeonly&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- ADD CATEGORIES BELOW THIS LINE --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Citation templates| ]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- ADD INTERWIKIS BELOW THIS LINE --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/includeonly&amp;gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Refend/doc&amp;diff=8201</id>
		<title>Template:Refend/doc</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Template:Refend/doc&amp;diff=8201"/>
		<updated>2011-03-08T05:22:06Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Slyons: 1 revision&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&amp;lt;noinclude&amp;gt;{{documentation subpage}}&amp;lt;/noinclude&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Usage ==&lt;br /&gt;
I have suggested this template as an option for usage in the second and third of three options for citing notes on a wikipedia article. The original discussion can be found [[Template talk:Reflist#Instances of ref-small|here]]. Below is a copy of the 3 suggested options...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Option 1 (only specific references) - see [[The Rule]]&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Option 2 (only general references) - see [[National Publications]]&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{refbegin}}&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 1&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 2&lt;br /&gt;
{{refend}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&#039;&#039;&#039;Option 3 (both specific and general references) - see [[Elephant]]&#039;&#039;&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{refbegin}}&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 1&lt;br /&gt;
* general reference 2&lt;br /&gt;
{{refend}}&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/pre&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* {{tl|Reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
* {{tl|Refbegin}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;includeonly&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- ADD CATEGORIES BELOW THIS LINE --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Citation templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;!-- ADD INTERWIKIS BELOW THIS LINE --&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/includeonly&amp;gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Slyons</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>