Content deleted Content added
Mdunlap ncsu (talk | contribs) →Overview: Fixed QoS being written differently across the article and added a sentence tying in SLO and the customer. |
Flesh out the statements about reference 2 |
||
Line 21:
* Mutually acceptable
In <ref>Alexander Keller, Heiko Ludwig "The WSLA Framework: Specifying and Monitoring Service Level Agreements for Web Services", Journal of Network and Systems Management, Vol 11, n. 1, March 2003.</ref> the authors define a SLO as a "commitment to maintain a particular state of the service in a given period" with respect to the state of the SLA parameters. They also state that while service providers will most often be the lead entity in taking on SLOs there is no firm definition as such and any entity can be responsible for an SLO. Along with this an SLO can be broken down into a number of different components.
* Obliged - The entity that is required to deliver the SLO.
* Validity Period - The time in which the SLO will be delivered.
* Expression - This is the actual language that defines what the SLO will be.
Optionally a EvaluationEvent maybe assigned to the SLO, which dictates the measure by with the SLO will be checked to see if it's meeting the Expression.
In <ref name=":0" /> the authors define the SLO as "the quality of service aspect of the agreement. Syntactically, it is an assertion over the terms of the agreement as well as such qualities as date and time".
| |||