Quality Of Service Support in Arrowhead v5

[borditamas]

Dear All,

we would like to bring the QoS discussion into the RoadMap meetings. During the last Arrowhead bi-weekly Ingolf (@InRiPa) and his team held a nice feature presentation about their work. The concept they worked out is really interesting and it would be a good candidate to implement in v5.

• Introducing QoS evaulators
  • These components applies QoS requirements based on given policies
  • AITIA note: these should be Arrowhead service providers and not executables from the same file system
• Introducing QoS policies
  • Multi level policies: Local Cloud default, system default, service default, custom (comes from the consumer)
  • Can come from external source (Configuration Support System maybe?)
• Introducing QoS evaulator modes
  • Filtering
  • Ranking

Please find attached their papers in this topic, especially the last slide of "20240716_QoS_AHF_FeaturePresentation" where the architecture is described.

20240716_QoS_AHF_FeaturePresentation.pdf crp-wict2023-id29.pdf concept_qos_management.pdf

Also, Péter Orosz (@oroszptr) from BME created a basic QoS evaulator concept, what we suggest to implement in the reference implementation of Arrowhead v5.

Please find attached his paper also:

Specification_Arrowhead_QoS_Evaluator.pdf

@jerkerdelsing @palvarga @PerOlofsson-Sinetiq

[jerkerdelsing]

Should the QoS Monitoring thinking be linked to the SysMonitor system and the Monitor service? Need to be discussed.

[borditamas]

Related notes from todays (23/08/2024) RoadMap discussion:

• The difference between Monitoring and QoS activity is that while monitoring the data is just collected and displayed, then during QoS the data is evaluated according to various policies for automated decision making.
• However, having a QoS evaluator which using the data collected by the Monitoring Support System could be a good approach.

[InRiPa]

Hi, just in case it might be useful, here you can find the reference implementation by @DanielMager