360º Degree Requirement Elicitation Framework for Cloud Service Providers

Versha Saxena Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 5, Issue 3, ( Part -1) March 2015, pp.50-55
www.ijera.com 50 | P a g e
360º Degree Requirement Elicitation Framework for Cloud
Service Providers
Versha Saxena*
and Dr. Deepak Arora#
Department of Computer Science Engineering, Amity School of Engineering & Technology, Amity University,
Lucknow, India
Abstract
Thisstudy addresses the factors responsible for cloud computing adoption in implementing cloud computing for
any organization. Service Level Agreements play a major role for cloud consumer as well as for cloud provider.
SLA depends on the requirements gathered by the cloud providers and they vary with the type of organizations
for which process is being performed such as education, retail, IT industry etc. SLAs for cloud computing
involves technical as well as business requirements which makes the gathering of requirements from
stakeholders point of view the heterogeneous process. This research work proposes a 360 degree requirement
gathering framework, which reduces the complexitiesduring the process of requirement gathering by cloud
service providersas well as SLAs more reliant.
I. INTRODUCTION
Implementation of cloud computing is difficult
task as cloud computing strategy has various
characteristics, Models, and Routines due to which
choice and fulfilment of requirements varyfor
achieving the system. In this paper authorshave
presented a short overview about cloud computing
which awakes about the specialities of Cloud
Services i.e. the applications delivered as paid or
unpaid services over the internet, the hardware, and
the systems. Basically cloudrepresents a standard for
services for its consumers, which includes shared
collection of computing resources like network,
software and hardware storage, applicationsi.e.
services which can be speedily arranged and
delivered with least vigilance reciprocal action efforts
or provider’s interaction. Cloud computing promotes
availability and it includes crucialcharacteristics,
routine, and deployment models.In this work authors
have proposed a 360 degree framework, which can be
used or extended by cloud providers for gathering
requirements and preparing SLAsfor any
organization in a more reliable and specific manner.
II. BACKGROUND
The journey began to look at Cloud computing
as a distinct subject as Ali[1] discussed about benefits
and risks of migration of data center to amazon EC2
from the point of organization[1].Annie dissused
tools,concepts &policies for better
allignment[2].Axel took requirement engineering
from software point and discussed about handling
exceptions while gathering requirements along with
goal oriented requirement engineering
approach[3,4,5].Bashar disscused about technologies
developed for specific requirement tasks[6].
Boehmdisscussed abut software risk
management[7].Buyya took cloud networking
including cloud bus for research[8].Chung discussed
Non functional requirements along with software
systems requirement engineering[9,10].Cloud
security alliance proposed roadmap for prioritizing
migration and transformation of cloud[11].Del took
formal and analytical methods for system engineering
[12].Easterbook marked term conflict consideration
for both requirement elicitation and system
design[13].Goguen discussed requirement
engineering [14] and Johnson focussed task analysis
in software engineering[15].Lutz discussed extension
of software modelling[16].Modugno discussed about
analysis of requirement specification[17].Pamela
focussed on research in requirement
engineering[18].Pearson targetted cloud privacy from
point of legal compliance and also has proposed an
approach for security of cloud
computing[19,20].Vivek proposed optimization
architecture for acheiving quality attributes for
applications hosted in the cloud[21].The performance
analysis has also been performed on diffrent bare
metal hypervisors along with openstack integration
[22,23]. Another work ralted to Cloud-ERP
implementation for small & Medium Enterprises is
also a step forward [24]. Smirti has proposed a
framework to ensure data security for cloud
environment [25]. Research work prevoiusly
performed on cloud computing focusses on service
discovery with run time techniques to inform and
balance the selection e.g- self managed applications
in the cloud,privacy in the cloud etcbut research on
cloud acquiring and endorsement is required to made
in future from cloud ratification engineering
perspective under which study related to acceptance
RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS

processes for stakeholders and implementation
processes needs to be performed.The need for such
research is important as there is retrenchment of
systematic methodologies which could help
individuals to mantle, meet and moderate their
requirements against cloud services provision.There
has been a recent research on cloud migration but this
research lacks any systematic approach for refining
and elaborating user’s requirements. The CSC cloud
adoption assessment has nothing about the accord
involved to conciliate various
specifications.Researches related with requirement
gathering have been performed for software
functional,non functional requirement etc but no
research has been performed from point of view of
cloud service providers for gathering requirements
from organizations for cloud computing
implementation.
III. FUNDAMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF
CLOUD COMPUTING
Cloud computing involves specific
characteristics by which Providers of cloud routines
can gather requirements. Stakeholders vary their
requirements on the basis of features they require for
their organizations and choice of required features
varies due to following Reasons:
A. Stakeholders are provided with computing
potential, such as time taken by Server and
network storage as required without any human
involvement with each service’s provider.
B. Services taken by stakeholders and accessed
through different standard client platforms
C. Cloud computing resources can be used by
different person on the basis of multi-occupancy
model where co-tenants are involved and
invisible to one another but affect each other in
equal or variable way with various sensible and
not sensible resources.
D. Capabilities are quickly extensible and
automatically have provision to scale out, and
can rapidly release to scale quickly in.
E. Metrics are used to measure resource usage
through which transparency can be provided on
providers and consumer’s usedservice.
F. 360 Degree implementation: Every field of
universe whether Medical, Engineering, Life
sciences etc. Concept of given framework can be
can be implemented.
Flaws of implementation which stakeholders as
well as final users need to take care of are as
follows:
i. DataLoss: As data will be in bulk at every
phase of implementation therefore meaning
full data safety is required.
ii. Networking: New layers or models are
required to be implemented so that security
may begin itself from the beginning of the
cloud implementation.Newly generated
models can be combination of various
existing layers or can be made with
meaningful Data Logic.
IV. ROUTINE MODELS
Here routine term is pointing towards regular
process to be followed for implementation of cloud,
cloud services are implemented with the help of
service models. Clarifying about models and services
provided by models helps stakeholders to choose
their services according to the need of their
organization. Many models for cloud computing are
available but three main models are as below:
A. CLOUD SOFTWARE AS A ROUTINE (SAAR) :
Here stakeholders use service provider’s
applications running on cloud. The applications are
accessible from various client devices through a thin
client interface such as a Web Browser. The
stakeholders are not responsible for controlling,
purchasing or software licensing the hidden cloud
infrastructure or even individual application
capabilities, with the possible restriction of specific
application configuration settings.
B. CLOUD PLATFORM AS A ROUTINE (PAAR):
Routine intends to develop, deploy and maintain
applications onto the cloud infrastructure. These
applications can be designed by consumer orcreated
using programming languages tools supported by the
provider. In this model stakeholders not responsible
for managing the underlying cloud infrastructure like
network, storage and operating systems but has
control over the deployed applications and hosting
application environment configurations.
C. CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE AS A ROUTINE (IAAR):
Stakeholders can perform processing,storage,
control selected networking (e.g. Firewall hosting)
components, and other fundamental computing by
which stakeholders arecapable of deploying and can
run inconsistent software, may also include operating
systems and applications. Cloud provider manages
`and controlsthe cloud infrastructure.
V. DEPLOYMENT MODELS
Deployment models in cloud computing play a
major role as all characteristics, services completely
depend on the type of deployment model used by the
cloud providers for the fulfilment of stakeholder’s
requirements. Deployment models brief view is as
below:
A. PRIVATE CLOUD:
Here cloud infrastructure is operated entirely for
an organization. It may be executed by the

organization or a third party and may exist on choice
of organization.
B. COMMUNITY CLOUD:
In this deployment model cloud is shared by
various organizations and supports regarding project
that has shared concerns (e.g., mission, security
requirements, policy, and compliance considerations).
It may be managed by the organizations or a third
party and may exist on or offbasis.
C. PUBLIC CLOUD:
Itis made available to the public or a large
industry group and is owned by an organization
selling cloud services.
D. HYBRID CLOUD:
In Hybridcloud infrastructure composition of
two or more clouds which remain unique entities but
are bound together by standardized or assistance
technology which enables data and application
portability.
VI. FRAMEWORK FOR CLOUD PROVIDERS
A. CLOUD RATIFICATION ENGINEERING
Cloud ratification engineering examines the
adoption processes for cloud computing in
organizations, it brought together the relation
between service level agreement and requirement
gathering approach applied by the cloud provider for
providing services in the specific organizations to
implement cloud computing, study of cloud
ratification engineering investigates the aspects that
need to be considered for collection of requirements
to implement cloud computing strategy in any kind
of organization. Cloud computing endorsement
cannot be recognized as incautious but instead it
requires many intermediary steps to be taken by the
cloud provider for delivery of required value to the
customer. Company size and type are the aspects
which cannot be underestimated for successful
adoption of cloud computing in organizations
therefore implementation of cloud computing
depends on the expertise of human resource asset,
operational factors and financial planning of the
organization.
Anotherimportant aspect is the kind of industry,
which rides the type of talent organizations hire, such
as the quantum of hires for financial services
corporations, employees are with backgrounds in
finance and accounting.Therefore operational
planning involves three aspects of a company's work:
how work will be performed, who will perform the
work and what resources are required to imperforate
work in each business area therefore operational
factors relate to working of any organization or plan.
Financial aspects include acquiring the resources,
investing amount on resources and management of
resources. Hence, gathering of requirements from
stakeholder’s point requires very confident strategy
to be accomplished which indirectly will support the
cloud service level agreement. Mostly delivered
systems of cloud do not fulfil requirements of
organization due to lack of particular methodology to
follow up for requirement gathering. Issues such as
evolving requirements e.g. addition, deletion of
requirements, fixing errors etc. brings inconsistency
in requirements [5], furthersteps to be taken for
modelling of data, domain etc. after such processes
analysis of final requirements is performed. Hence
processes which are performed in between takes long
span of time and do not claim to be useful. Successful
cloud computing acceptance must include areas of
security, legal and compliance, integration, company
size etc. It integrates these critical issues into each
phase of strategy for successful cloud computing
requirement gathering framework. Cloud providers
can use this framework to address strategic issues at
each stage of requirement collection for particular
organization.
B. FRAMEWORK FOR REQUIREMENT GATHERING
The necessity of cooperation between
stakeholders and service providers cannot
beoverstated as successful implementation of cloud
computing depends on cooperation between
them .Proposed Model involves complete
determination of organization for implementation of
cloud computing which signifies 360 degree
coverage.This framework proposes sixphases in the
requirement gathering ofcloud computing project.
These are Business plan Analysis, Review of HOF
factors,Cloud services,cloud type,Risk factor
reasoning and proof of concept. In Figure.1 below the
basic view of phases chosen in the model are
shown on the basis of all important factors to be
covered for any organization and is known as Basic
framework.
Fig. 1: 360º Cloud requirement gathering Basic
framework
Here Figure.2 explains moderate framework
where input phases of model along with the output

obtained at the end of each phase works as input of
next phase .
Fig. 2: 360º Cloud requirement gathering Moderate
framework with outputs
In Figure.3 Final framework is obtained and
shows complete research diagramaticaly. Therefore,
360 degree framework comprises of Basic, moderate
and extreme model containing all facts.
The framework phases are as follows:
A.Business planAnalysis:Here an analysis of the
required system, applications, business processes,
return on investment, flexibility, customer
satisfaction of organization, payment model is
performed in order to ascertain the directions. This
phase identifies the strengths and weakness of the
existing systems, business process, and impact of
moving to cloud.As an output this phase produces
Cloud ratification catalogue (CRC) which will
contain all the details analysed at this phase.
B. Review Of HOF Factors:In this phase Review of
organisation structure is performed which involves
human resource factors, operational factors, and
financial factors.Human resource factor includes
personal and access rights, training and awareness of
human asset of organization which requires
development of policies and standards and it will
provide reliable and reasonable activities after cloud
implementation, To develop capabilities and
operation procedures for opearations which
organization performs for its customers.At last
financial budget of payment for cloud is
inspected.Cloud HOF catalogue is the final output of
this phase.
Fig. 3: 360º Cloud requirement gathering Extreme
framework
C. CloudService Labelling:Here we discuss about
services to be offered to the organization
softwares,hardwares,guidelines and mandates for
information security,governance structure i.e
auditability and accountability between cloud
provider and cloud consumer, assurance for
infrastructure being properly protected, Guidelines
for security management, authorization and
authentication procedures for IT resources and
data,procedures for reporting security events and
problems,disaster recovery planning, agreement
conditons for down time, data processing priorities in
service level agreement and for legal and security
standards policies and best practices.At last of this
phase Cloud classification catalogue will be
generated.
D.Cloud Type Ordination:In this phase decision
about cloud deployment model to be implemented is
decided according to the results of previous phases.
Advantages and disadvantages of cloud type will
directly impact the organization structure therefore
result of this phase affects the required product.This
phase produces Cloud Classification Catalogue i.e. C
cube on the basis of which Testing plan, back up plan,
surveillance plan ,maintenance plan and
implementation planning is done.
E. Risk Factors Reasoning: Cloud computing always
prioritize fulfillment of business requirements over
technical requirements. Therefore comparison among
advantages, risks, business requirements,technical
requirements,services to be provided, cloud type and
cloud economics will be performed then mapping is
done among them through which a scanning can be
performed to prioritise business requirements
fulfillment over technical requirements and risks.At

the end of this phase cloud risk mapping
catalogue(CRM) is obtained.
F.Proof of Concept: Here Prototype demonstration
of finalized IT facilities to be provided will be shown
as proof by the cloud vendor to cloud
consumer.Therefore it is most important for
successful implementation of cloud computing that
choosencloud providers must have stong market
position and have successfully implemented projects
concerning to with cloud in their past.Cloud terminal
catalogue(CTC) will be received by the stakeholder
and at last union catalog can be generated containing
all kinds of records including details such as design,
location of data etc in online library form ,union
catalog should be with both cloud provider as well as
cloud stakeholder.
VII. CONCLUSION
Cloud computing convinced many organisations
and individuals for moving their computing
operations, data, and/or commissioning their e-
services to the cloud.The acceptance of cloud
computing is gaining push because most of the
services provided by the cloud are of low cost
and instantly available. The intent of research is to
develop requirement gathering framework which
will enable successful implementation of cloud
computing by cloud providers and acceptance by
stakeholders.The major advantage of proposed
research work inclodes easy implementation for
cloud providers,i.e. assures 360 degree security and
error proof configurations, more reliable service level
agreement for cloud stakeholder and outputs
obtained at each phase makes the implementation,
more reliable and robust.
VIII. FUTURE SCOPE
Cloud computing as a computing standard has
existed for just a short period of time. Thereforethe
scope for further research is broad, There is need for
more case studies to evaluate the framework and
case studies from both acknowledged and
unsuccessful projects will help to improve the
framework.Impact of framework on cloud providers
as well as on organizations are the areas which are
required to work upon.Service level agreements for
cloud providers and for cloud consumers need to be
focussed .
IX. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to thank respected Mr. Aseem
Chauhan, Chancellor, Amity University, Lucknow
and Maj. Gen. K.K. Ohri AVSM (Retd.), Pro.Vice-
Chancellor, Amity University, Lucknow for
providing excellent facilities in university campus
and their encouragement and advice. We would also
like to pay regards to Prof. S.T.H. Abidi who is
pioneer in teaching as because of him we have
explored our research in depth and enjoyed doing so,
Director and Brig. U. K. Chopra, Deputy Director,
Amity University, Lucknow for their enabling access
to the variety of reputed and Authorised books and
journals that we have been able to refer to.
REFERENCES
[1] Ali Khajeh-Hosseini, David Greenwood, Ian
Sommerville (2010). Cloud Migration: A
Case Study of Migrating an Enterprise IT
System to IaaS. In Proceedings of the 3rd
International Conference on Cloud
Computing, Pages: 450-457, ISBN: 978-0-
7695-4130-3, CS Press.
[2] Annie I. Anton and Colin Potts. (1998). The
Use of Goals to Surface Requirements for
evolving systems. In Proceedings of
International Conference on Software
Engineering. Pages: 157-166, CS Press.
[3] Axel van Lamsweerde. (2000). Handling
Obstacles in Goal Oriented Requirements
Engineering. In IEEE Transactions on
Software Engineering. Vol. 26, No. 10,
Pages: 978- 1005, October 2000.
[4] Axel van Lamsweerde. (2004). Goal-
Oriented Requirements Engineering: A
Roundtrip from Research to Practice. In
Proceedings of 12th
IEEE International
Requirements Engineering Conference.
Kyoto.
[5] Axel van Lamsweerde. (2001). Goal-
Oriented Requirements Engineering: A
Guided Tour.
[6] Bashar Nueibeh and Steve Easterbrook
(2000). Requirements Engineering: A
Roadmap. In The Future of Software
Engineering. Pages: 35-46, ACM Press.
[7] Boehm, B. (1991). Software Risk
Management: Principles and Practices. IEEE
Software, 8(1): 32-41.
[8] BUYYA, R., YEO, C. S., et al. (2009)
Cloud computing and emerging IT platforms:
Vision, Hype, and reality for delivering
computing as the 5th utility. Future
Generation Computer Systems, 25, 599 -
616.
[9] Chung, L, Nixon, B., Yu, E. & Mylopoulos,
J. (2000). Non- Functional Requirements in
Software Engineering. Boston: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
[10] Chung, L. (1993). Dealing with Security
Requirements during the Development of
Information Systems. 5th International
Conference on Advanced Information
Systems Engineering (CAiSE'93), Pads,
France, 1993, pp. 234-251

[11] Cloud Security Alliance. (2010). CSC
trusted Cloud services Get Started on Your
Cloud Journey. Paper published on the
web,http://assets1.csc.com/cloud/downloads
/0717_11_Cloud_CAA_Brochure_v3. Pdf
[12] Del Gobbo, D., Napolitano, M., Callahan, J.
& Cukic B. (1998). Experience in
Developing System Requirements
Specification for a Sensor Failure Detection
and Identification Scheme. 3rd High-
Assurance Systems Engineering Symposium,
Washington, DC, USA, 13-14 November
1998.
[13] Easterbrook, S. M. (1991). Resolving
Conflicts between Domain Descriptions
with Computer-Supported Negotiation.
Knowledge Acquisition: An International
Journal, 3: 255 -289.
[14] G0guen, J. & Jirotka, M. (Ed.). (1994).
Requirements Engineering: Social and
Technical issues. London: Academic Press.
[15] Johnson, P. (1992). Human-Computer
Interaction: psychology, tusk analysis and
software engineering. McGraw-Hill.
[16] Lutz, R., Helmer, G., Moseman, M.,
Statezni, D. & Tockey, S. (1998). Safety
Analysis of Requirements for a Product
Family. 3rd
1EEE International Conference
on Requirements Engineering (ICRE '98),
Colorado Springs, USA, 6-10 April 1998, pp.
24-31.
[17] Modugno, F., Leveson, N. G., Reese, J. D.,
Partridge, K. & Sandys, S. D. (1997).
Integrating Safety Analysis of Requirements
Specifications. 3rd IEEE International
Symposium on Requirements Engineering
(RE'97), Annapolis, USA, 6-10 January
1997, pp. 148- 159.
[18] Pamela Zave. 1997. Classification of
Research Efforts in Requirements
Engineering. In ACM Computing Survey
(1997), Vol. 29, No.4, Pages: 315-321.
[19] Siani Pearson and Andrew Charles worth.
(2009). Accountability as a Way Forward
for Privacy Protection in the Cloud. In
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume
5931/2009, Pages: 131-144, DOI:
10.1007/978-3-642-10665-1_12. Springer-
Verlag
[20] Siani Pearson. (2009). Taking Account of
Privacy when Designing Cloud Computing
Services. In Proceedings of the ICSE
Workshop on Software Engineering
Challenges of Cloud Computing, Pages: 44-
52, ISBN: 978-1-4244-3713-9. CS Press.
[21] VivekNallurand Rami Bahsoon. (2010).
Design of a Market-Based Mechanism for
Quality Attributes Tradeoff of Services in
the Cloud. In Proceedings of the 2010
ACMSymposium on Applied Computing.
Pages: 367-371, ISBN: 978-1-60
[22] Deepak Arora, Varun Kumar,
Prabhat Kumar Verma, AMQ Protocol
Based Performance Analysis of Bare Metal
Hypervisors, IJERA,2014, ISSN : 2248-
9622, Vol. 4, Issue 6 (Version 4), June 2014,
pp.59-64
[23] Deepak Arora,,Varun Kumar, B. Jagdeep,
PrabhatVerma, Proposed Model For Virtual
Labs Interaction With Openstack Integration
Using KVM Hypervisor, International
Journal of Scientific & Technology
Research VOL. 3, ISSUE 7, JULY 2014
ISSN 2277-8616
[24] VaibhavVerma, Deepak Arora, Cloud-ERP
Limitations and Benefits with Special
Reference to Small & Medium Enterprises,
IJERA, 2014, ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4,
Issue 6 (Version 3), June 2014, pp.170-174
[25] Smriti, Deepak Arora, Ensuring Data
Security for Secure Cloud Hybrid
Framework, International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications, Vol.
3, Issue 4, ISSN: 2248-9622, pp.2217-2221,
Jul-Aug 2013,

360º Degree Requirement Elicitation Framework for Cloud Service Providers

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to 360º Degree Requirement Elicitation Framework for Cloud Service Providers

Recently uploaded

360º Degree Requirement Elicitation Framework for Cloud Service Providers