Eugenio Zimeo graduated in 1999 with an M.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Salerno, Italy, and in 1999, a doctorate in computer science from the University of Naples, Italy. He is currently an Associate Professor at the University of Sannio, Benevento, Italy. His research priorities include software architectures and frameworks for distributed systems, high-performance middleware, service-oriented computing, grid and cloud, and wireless sensor networks. He has published approximately 90 scientific papers in journals and specialized conferences and directs many major research projects. A service level contract is an agreement between two or more parties, one being the customer and other service providers. It may be a formal or informal legally binding “treaty” (for example. B internal relations within the department). The agreement may include separate organizations or different teams within an organization. Contracts between the service provider and other third parties are often referred to as SLAs (wrongly) – the level of service having been set by the (main) customer, there can be no “agreement” between third parties; these agreements are simply “contracts.” However, operational agreements or olea agreements can be used by internal groups to support ALS.

If an aspect of a service has not been agreed with the customer, it is not an “ALS.” If ALS refers to an entire service, it is difficult to preset each scenario. They therefore need more general types of problems, still clearly defined enough to allow for a logical categorization of more detailed types of problems. Schedule monthly or quarterly meetings to discuss the service`s results. Initiate any necessary changes due to unforeseen business events or changes in business priorities. Make coordination a bilateral effort. ALS only makes sense if both sides are preparing for a mutual agreement. A company should not apply a customer`s requirements just to get the agreement. Similarly, when sending counter offers, they should only offer terms that they can reach and that they consider satisfactory to the customer. Dynamic customer requirements and the availability of vendor resources in the cloud market make them insufficient static approaches to ensure the QoS level (quality of service) and set prices. In this context, dynamic information negotiations are a viable way to achieve a high level of satisfaction on both sides. We propose to use capacity planning to support bilateral negotiation processes, in order to maximize benefits for service providers by avoiding contracts that could arise in the event of a breach of Service Level Agreements (SLAs), while maintaining competitive prices.

The proposed technique uses a non-additive use function defined in the area of acceptable ALS proposals, taking into account the desired QoS and the availability of resources, costs and expected penalties. Experimental analysis shows the usefulness of the proposed dynamic approach in terms of static In a scenario characterized by a set of customers and differentiated classes of applications provided by a cloud environment. Often, a multi-level ALS structure is adopted to avoid duplication and reduce the frequency of updates, as in the following example of a three-step ALS structure: The Service Level Agreement expands the definition of service level from the service catalog and sets detailed service level objectives, mutual responsibilities and other specific requirements for a specific (group). The emphasis is on defining requirements from the customer`s point of view.