Verifying Deadlock- and Livelock Freedom in an SOA Scenario

In a service-oriented architecture (SOA), a service broker assigns a previously published service (stored in a service registry) to a service requester. It is desirable for the composition of the requesting and the assigned service to interact properly. While proper interaction is often reducedto deadlock freedom of the composed system, we additionally consider livelock freedom as a desirable property for the interaction of services. In principle, deadlock- and livelock freedom can be verified by inspecting the state space of the composition of (public views of) the involvedservices.The contribution of this paper is to propose a methodology to build that state space from pre-computed fragments which are computed upon publishing a service. That way, we shiftcomputation time from the time critical request phase of service brokerage to the less critical publish phase. Interestingly, our setting enables state space reduction methods that are intrinsically different from traditional state space reductions.

[1]  Niels Lohmann,et al.  Operating Guidelines for Finite-State Services , 2007, ICATPN.

[2]  Mathias Weske,et al.  The P2P Approach to Interorganizational Workflows , 2001, International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering.

[3]  Tadao Murata,et al.  Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications , 1989, Proc. IEEE.

[4]  David Park,et al.  Concurrency and Automata on Infinite Sequences , 1981, Theoretical Computer Science.

[5]  Erich J. Neuhold,et al.  IPSI-PF.A business process matchmaking engine based on annotated finite state automata , 2005, Inf. Syst. E Bus. Manag..

[6]  Jeffrey J. P. Tsai,et al.  Compositional verification of concurrent systems using Petri-net-based condensation rules , 1998, TOPL.

[7]  Francisco Curbera,et al.  Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0 , 2007 .

[8]  Frank Leymann,et al.  Web services and business process management , 2002, IBM Syst. J..

[9]  Alain Kerbrat,et al.  CADP - A Protocol Validation and Verification Toolbox , 1996, CAV.

[10]  Alfred V. Aho,et al.  The Transitive Reduction of a Directed Graph , 1972, SIAM J. Comput..

[11]  Wolfgang Reisig,et al.  Analyzing BPEL4Chor: Verification and Participant Synthesis , 2007, WS-FM.

[12]  Niels Lohmann,et al.  Analyzing Interacting BPEL Processes , 2006, Business Process Management.

[13]  Antti Valmari,et al.  Weakest-Congruence Results for Livelock-Preserving Equivalences , 1999, CONCUR.

[14]  Karsten Wolf,et al.  Does My Service Have Partners? , 2009, Trans. Petri Nets Other Model. Concurr..

[15]  Carlos Delgado Kloos,et al.  Applying model checking to BPEL4WS business collaborations , 2005, SAC '05.

[16]  Robin Milner,et al.  Communication and concurrency , 1989, PHI Series in computer science.

[17]  Niels Lohmann,et al.  Analyzing interacting WS-BPEL processes using flexible model generation , 2008, Data Knowl. Eng..

[18]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Model Checking , 1999, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.

[19]  Antti Valmari,et al.  The Weakest Deadlock-Preserving Congruence , 1995, Inf. Process. Lett..