Links table
Abstract and 1 introduction
2 background and motivation
2.1 Infrastructure for decentralized and cloud computing
2.2 Diffas’s advantages
2.3 System requirements
3 Looking for Diffas
4 detailed design for Defaas and 4.1 decentralization scheduling and loading budget
4.2 Distribution of decentralized events
4.3 Register an interface program programming and access control
4.4 Support OATH2.0
4.5 Registration and bills and 4.6 confidence management
4.7 Support for a multiple black service network
5 Implementation and evaluation
5.1 Applications
5.2 experiments
5.3 Evaluation
6 related work
7 conclusions and references
4.5 pieces of trees and filling
Our basic system allows the decentralized login to services in multi -box data centers. For the reason, instead of cutting trees on the chain, the decision is to use registration outside the chain. It is preferable to use the infrastructure to cut decentralized trees. Fortunately, IPFs [Benet(2014)] It has been proposed and experienced in the past as an infrastructure for decentralized registration cutting[3].
It is permissible to hold the API gate and the API’s end -of -user bill. For bills, the portal contract can track the number of applications from each user, success and response to each request, including implementation of the function resulting from the events, and the submissions of the relevant end point. Later, the contract of the portal can use user by sending requests and receipts to Blockchain management. If an end point is presented as a service, the portal can hold the user bill on behalf of the final point providers.
For the reasons for performance, bills are not at the level of demand. The portal contract can accumulate statistics, and the user invoice when the amount reaches a certain level or when the time interval reaches the bills cycle (for example, a month). This means that the bills are not synchronous. This design greatly reduces public expenditures compared to the alternative that requires the process of paying the chain for each API call. Users need to provide a wallet address and/or deposit to Blockchain management. For example, the user may deposit USDC for a smart contract first for the next bills.[4]. The portal contract reserves the storage of cache to balance each user. To avoid negative balance, the portal contract can use the value of the watermark. When the accumulated bill reaches the watermark, the receipt of bills will be sent to the management chain.
On the other hand, in order to prevent the gate knot from the user’s excess charging, the system requires the gate node to keep a copy of the processed requests. Each Nonce request includes and the user creates a digital signature upon request. Therefore, Gateway Node cannot create fake requests and the user cannot refuse a request for submission.
4.6 Confidence Management
Confidence management is necessary for a central system. Some main entities include the system participating: Cloud service providers, API gate holding, FAAS ends, Blockchain contract and users. As shown earlier, cloud service providers are trusted somewhat. Note that in our current design, FAAS is mainly dedicated to applications outside the series and the processing outside the series. Blockchain (BESU) can be evidence of creativity. Confidence management in other entities such as the gate contract and the end of the finishing points can be on the basis of quotas, reputable or hybrid between the share and reputation. For example, exhaustion can be needed to hold the gate. Entities that deviate from the protocol or display can be punished (for example, lowering). To reduce the effect on performance, the process based on conflict resolution can be applied. The system stores all API calls and responses in decentralized records. When there is a conflict, the user can raise a claim against either the Gateway Consort knot or the end of the end of the end point service. Then governance can be used on the chain to resolve the conflict. This mechanism can be found in many Blockchain projects such as Blockchain insurance and governance on the series for the protocol participants.
4.7 Support for a multiple black service network
The concept of service service [Li et al.(2019)] It is an extension of small service. With the service network, a group of small services is linked to forming a processing pipeline. The current design and the service network implement the idea of the network of knowledge by programs (SDN) to separate joint jobs and specific service functions. This separation greatly improves small services from different views, such as effective management and flexible publishing. However, the current service network structure does not support multiple fluid. This greatly limits the use and accreditation of the service network when the application depends on small services that belong to multiple cloud services providers.
Defaas provides all basic functions to support multiple Service Mesh Cross service. From the architecture perspective, Defaas Management Blockchain works as a multiple control aircraft coordinator. These control aircraft are managed by different cloud service providers, and each of them runs their service network. When sending an order to a service provider, but the corresponding control level cannot solve the corresponding information, it can inquire about the Blockchain management.
Authors:
(1) Rabimba Karanjai, Computer Science Department, Houston University ([email protected]);
(2) Lei Xu, Computer Science Department, Kent State State;
(3) Lynn Chen, Computer Science Department, Texas University;
(4) Nour Diallo, Department of Computer Science, Houston University;
(5) Weidong Shi, Computer Science Department, Houston University.
[3] To protect confidentiality, the records are encrypted when stored on the IPFs.
[4] Note that this step may involve crossed chain transactions.
