Ob # Management Group: CORBA Components, v 3.0, OMG document formal/02-0665, June 2002  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....policies, which can be enforced in different ways by careless, or even malicious administrators. A popular trend in distributed systems is to encapsulate functionality as objects and provide mechanisms for their location, migration and, persistence, as well as for remote method invocation. CORBA [2] [3] DCOM [8] and Legion [12] are examples of distributed systems using this paradigm. Each of them handles security in its own way, and the main objectives are authenticating the communicating parties, protecting network traffic, enforcing access control policies on the object s member ....

The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specification, revision 2.4.2. www.omg.org, Oct 2000. OMG Document formal/00-02-33.

....If some replicas fail, the others can continue to offer the service. At this end, servers can be replicated according to one of the following replication techniques: active replication or passive replication (primary backup approach) 13] The Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) [22][25] is a standard for object oriented distributed applications. It consists of a nfiddleware on top of which applications can be designed, implemented and deployed in a very easy way. Moreover CORBA presents high object oriented wrapping capabilities that fits well in the context of heterogeneous ....

Object Management Group: The Common Object Request Broker Architecture and Specifications. Revision 2.3. OMG Document formal/98-12-01, OMG, Framingham, MA, 1998.

....policies, which can be enforced in different ways by careless, or even malicious administrators. A popular trend in distributed systems is to encapsulate functionality as objects and provide mechanisms for their location, migration and, persistence, as well as for remote method invocation. CORBA [2] [3] DCOM [9] and Legion [13] are examples of distributed systems using this paradigm. Each of them handles security in its own way, and the main objectives are authenticating the communicating parties, protecting network traffic, enforcing access control policies on the object s member ....

The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specification, revision 2.6. www.omg.org, Oct 2000. OMG Document formal/01-12-01.

....layer of facilities provides: the migration facility to support the mobility of agents and resources. Resource reallocation in SOMA is achieved by encapsulating resources within agents that can move in the network either via native migration method or via CORBA Internet Inter ORB Protocol [30] and the MASIF standard interface [16] the naming facility to associate entities with globally unique identifiers (GUID) and to organize these identifiers in name systems able to trace entities even if they move. This facility allows to put together a set of different naming systems (DNS , ....

....Discovery Tracing Mobility Add on Module QoS Adaptation Interoperability Security Figure 2. SOMA architecture: facilities and mobility module. The interoperability facility allows SOMA agents to interwork with existing software and hardware components via compliance with CORBA [30]. SOMA agents can play the role of CORBA clients through either static (IDL stub) or dynamic (Dynamic Invocation Interface) invocations. In an analogous way, SOMA agents can register themselves as CORBA servers to offer access points to an application outside the SOMA system via either static IDL ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Object Management Group. CORBA/IIOP Rev 2.3. OMG Document formal/98-12-01, http://www.omg.org/library/, Dec. 1998.

....security mechanisms to grant the level of security required by 3 different organizations. In addition, they should interoperate with legacy systems, based on either SNMP or CMIP, and even with emerging management tools that are built upon the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) [9] or upon the MA technology. This paper describes a secure and open MA environment for the management of networks, services and systems, called MAMAS (Mobile Agents for the Management of Applications and Systems) Security and interoperability have been taken into account since the first phase of ....

.... resident on a CORBA C S place, is able to act as a CORBA client server both through static invocation registration (IDL stub skeleton) and dynamic ones (DII DSI) Our implementation, based on Inprise VisiBroker ORB [39] exploits only the portable functions provided by its Portable Object Adapter [9], to avoid any closure within a particular ORB realization. Even if there is no conceptual problem for a mobile agent to register itself as a CORBA server, we currently grant this possibility only to MAMAS agents that do not migrate during their lifetime (stationary agents) in order to avoid the ....

Object Management Group, CORBA/IIOP Rev 2.2, OMG Document formal/98-07-01, http://www.omg.org/corba/corbaiiop, Feb. 1998.

....to consider new management models to overcome the limits of traditional centralized client server approaches. There is a growing interest in taking into account Web based management systems [2 4] and in adopting integration standards such as CORBA that also permits to deal with legacy components [5 8]. There is strong emphasis in the use of mobile entities to provide flexible, scalable, and effective management solutions by programming network resources dynamically [9 13] There are also encompassing efforts in defining open architectures to integrate the management of traditional ....

....through local access to managed resources. In particular, in this paper, we focus on the Agent based Interoperability Facility (AIF) and on the Agentbased Security Facility (ASF) The AIF permits to interoperate with already existing services and legacy components, via compliance with OMG CORBA [5]. In consideration of the increasing diffusion of MA systems, the AIF is also conformant with the Mobile Agent System Interoperability Facility (MASIF) 17] to permit agent exchanges between heterogeneous MA platforms. The ASF answers the typical security concerns of management in the Internet ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Object Management Group, CORBA/IIOP Rev 2.2, OMG Document formal/98-07-01, http://www.omg.org/ corba/corbaiiop, Feb. 1998.

.... to overcome data heterogeneity, the VM framework integrates MA with the more traditional client server model of interaction, by exploiting widely diffused database access technologies, such as JDBC and ODBC [22, 20] and standardized solutions for distributed object infrastructures such as CORBA [21]. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the VM framework requirements and briefly proposes guidelines for solution. Section 3 underlines the properties of mobile agents that claim for the adoption of the MA technology to implement the VM infrastructure. Section 4 presents the ....

....(ANF) the ANF permits to identify dynamically any entity in the system, i.e. possibly mobile) agents, users, terminals and resources. The ANF is implemented in terms of coordinated agents, and can interoperate with several naming standards, e.g. DNS , CORBA , and LDAP compliant naming services [1, 12, 21]. The ANF is based on the association of a globally unique identifier with any SOMA public entity, making possible its dynamic tracing. Frequently moving entities have fixed care of agents that keep updated the entity current position information; entities with lower mobility degree are traced by ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Object Management Group. CORBA/IIOP Rev 2.3. OMG Document formal/98-12-01, http://www.omg.org/library/, Dec. 1998.

....to simplify the deployment of MA based services. On top of the basic layer, the security module makes available a large number of security mechanisms and tools, to permit different tradeoffs between performance and security, while the interoperability module exploits the CORBA technology [5] to achieve the full integration with other CORBAcompliant environments, based on distributed OO frameworks and on MA platforms via the Mobile Agent System Interoperability Facility (MASIF) 6] MASIF is a standard proposal to support agent mobility and management and is built on top of CORBA. We ....

....requires to identify the aspects of the MA technology candidate to become standard. The main recognized effort in the standardization toward interoperability of Object Oriented components is Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) promoted by the Object Management Group (OMG) [5]. The OMG works in different specialized areas, and one of its subgroups has defined the MASIF standard [6] MASIF integrates the traditional C S model and the MA paradigm, thus providing CORBA based interfaces for agent registering, management and transfer. There are also other interesting ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Object Management Group, CORBA/IIOP Rev 2.2, OMG Document formal/98-07-01, http://www.omg.org/corba/ corbaiiop, Feb. 1998.

....requires to identify the aspects of the MA technology candidate to become standard. The main recognized effort in the standardization toward interoperability of Object Oriented components is Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) promoted by the Object Management Group (OMG) [4]. The OMG works in different specialized areas, and one of its subgroups has defined the MASIF standard [5] MASIF integrates the traditional C S model and the MA paradigm, thus providing CORBA based interfaces for agent registration, management and transfer. There are also other interesting ....

Object Management Group, CORBA/IIOP Rev 2.2, OMG Document formal/98-07-01, http://www.omg.org/library/, Feb. 1998.

No context found.

Object Management Group, Audio/Video Streams, v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-01-03.

No context found.

Object Management Group, Event Service v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-06-15.

No context found.

Object Management Group, Event Service v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-06-15, 2000.

No context found.

Object Management Group, Audio/Video Streams, v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-01-03.

No context found.

Object Management Group. CORBA Components, Version 3.0, Jun 2002. OMG document formal/02-06-65.

No context found.

Object Management Group. Naming Service 1.2. OMG Document formal/2002-09-02, September 2002.

....in order to increase the usability for developers. For example, a fixed number of binding types could be standardised and component level meta data could be used to declaratively select between them. 19 CORBA services such as the event service [OMG,00b] or the audio video streams service [OMG,00c] represent an attempt to provide different binding types. However, this approach has major disadvantages with respect to our CF based approach. New binding types are implemented in an ad hoc way by exploiting non portable lowerlevel platform interfaces, and there is no coordination between the ....

Object Management Group, Audio/Video Streams, v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-01-03.

....the degrees of freedom offered by the platform in order to increase the usability for developers. For example, a fixed number of binding types could be standardised and component level meta data could be used to declaratively select between them. 19 CORBA services such as the event service [OMG,00b] or the audio video streams service [OMG,00c] represent an attempt to provide different binding types. However, this approach has major disadvantages with respect to our CF based approach. New binding types are implemented in an ad hoc way by exploiting non portable lowerlevel platform ....

Object Management Group, Event Service v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-06-15.

....in order to increase the usability for developers. For example, a fixed number of binding types could be standardised and component level meta data could be used to declaratively select between them. 19 CORBA services such as the event service [OMG,00b] or the audio video streams service [OMG,00c] represent an attempt to provide different binding types. However, this approach has major disadvantages with respect to our CF based approach. New binding types are implemented in an ad hoc way by exploiting non portable lowerlevel platform interfaces, and there is no coordination between the ....

Object Management Group, Audio/Video Streams, v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-01-03.

....the degrees of freedom offered by the platform in order to increase the usability for developers. For example, a fixed number of binding types could be standardised and component level meta data could be used to declaratively select between them. 19 CORBA services such as the event service [OMG,00b] or the audio video streams service [OMG,00c] represent an attempt to provide different binding types. However, this approach has major disadvantages with respect to our CF based approach. New binding types are implemented in an ad hoc way by exploiting non portable lowerlevel platform ....

Object Management Group, Event Service v1.0, OMG Document formal/2000-06-15.

....A software component is an independent unit in a sense that its interface, which includes both the offered services and the context dependencies, is specified explicitly. This facilitates an easy reuse of components without knowledge of their internals. In contemporary Java component systems [2,6,13,15], the offered services are represented by a set of interfaces that a component provides, and the context dependencies are represented by a set of interfaces that a component requires. Given the provided and required interfaces, a component is represented by a set of classes that implement the ....

Object Management Group: CORBA Components, v 3.0, OMG document formal/02- 06-65

....A software component is an independent unit in a sense that its interface, which includes both the offered services and the context dependencies, is specified explicitly. This facilitates an easy reuse of components without knowledge of their internals. In contemporary Java component systems [2,6,13,15], the offered services are represented by a set of interfaces that a component provides, and the context dependencies are represented by a set of interfaces that a component requires. Given the provided and required interfaces, a component is represented by a set of classes that implement the ....

Object Management Group: CORBA Components, v 3.0, OMG document formal/02- 06-65

.... The first interoperability functionality allows MESIS agents to act as CORBA clients, for example, to control legacy network components via CORBA interfaces [7, 8] to exploit services and facilities provided by any CORBA DPE (e.g. Transactions, Collection and Trader Object Services [34]) and to invoke other CORBA compliant services provided by existing management environments [6] MESIS DPE components can also become CORBA servers to offer their services to other entities. This 7 enlarges the accessibility of a MESIS service to any existing client, independently of its ....

Object Management Group, CORBA Services, OMG Document formal/98-12-11, ftp://www.omg.org/pub/docs/formal/98-12-11.pdf, Dec. 1998.

No context found.

Ob # Management Group: CORBA Components, v 3.0, OMG document formal/02-0665, June 2002

No context found.

Object Management Group: MOF Specification, version 1.4, OMG document formal/02-04-03, April 2002

No context found.

Object Management Group: CORBA Components, v. 3.0, OMG document formal/02-06-65

No context found.

Object Management Group: Meta Object Facility Specification, version 1.4, OMG document formal/02-04-03

No context found.

Object Management Group. Notification service, omg document formal/00-0620. Technical report, June 2000.

No context found.

Object Management Group: CORBA, v. 3.0.1, OMG document formal/02-11-01

No context found.

Object Management Group: Meta Object Facility Specification, version 1.4, OMG document formal/0204 -03

No context found.

Object Management Group. Notification Service, 1.0 edition, 2000. OMG Document formal/2000-06-20.

No context found.

The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specification. www.omg.org, Oct 2000. OMG Document formal/01-12-01.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC