hash stringlengths 32 32 | doc_id stringlengths 7 13 | section stringlengths 3 121 | content stringlengths 0 2.2M |
|---|---|---|---|
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 3.2 Abbreviations | For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply: ASN.1 Abstract Syntax Notation No 1 CASE Computer Assisted Software Engineering CORBA Common Object Request Broker Architecture CTMF Conformance Testing Methodology and Framework GDMO Guidelines for the Definition of Managed Objects IS Information System ISDN Integrated Services Digital Network MAP Member Approval Procedure MSC Message Sequence Chart MV Member Voting process NSO National Standards Organization OMA Object Management Architecture ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 8 OMG Object Management Group OMT Object Modelling Technique ONP Open Network Provision OO Object-Orientation PE Public Enquiry process PIXIT Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing RFP Requests For Proposal ROOM Real-Time Object-Oriented Modelling language RTAD Real-Time Analysis and Design SDL Specification and Description Language SMIF Stream-based Message Interchange Format STF Specialist Task Force TAP Two-step Approval Procedure TB ETSI Technical Body TTCN Tree and Tabular Combined Notation UML Unified Modelling Language WG Working Group WI Work Item XMI XML Metadata Interchange XML eXtensible Markup Language |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4 Feasibility study | The following activities were undertaken in order to evaluate the use of object-orientation in the ETSI standardization process and these are reported here: - review of the existing standardization process within ETSI; - review of UML methods and standardization; - application of UML to existing standards in three case studies: - a protocol standard; - a test specification; - a specification of physical characteristics; - review of existing tool support for UML. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.1 Standardization process | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.2 ETSI Standardization Process | Before being able to assess the value of using object-orientation in the ETSI standardization process, it is necessary to review this process itself. The ETSI standardization process has evolved over a number of years and although methods exist and are well documented for the development of many different types of standards, those parts of the overall process which deal with the expression and maintenance of requirements are still very informal. The process varies considerably in detail between the different Technical Bodies (TB) within ETSI although the general principles are common throughout. More established technologies generally take a more conservative approach ensuring that standards are not published until a high degree of confidence has been established in their contents. TBs responsible for newer technologies, however, often need to satisfy much tighter market constraints and are usually willing to publish standards before they have passed through such a rigorous public review phase. The whole standardization process is summarized in Table 1. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 9 Table 1: Overview of the ETSI standardization process No. Step Description 1 Proposal from one or more members for a subject of standardization Proposals can come in various forms. Sometimes a simple proposal from one member organization but more often from a group of members who see some business potential in the particular area of standardization. It is also unusual for a single standard to be proposed. It is more likely that the proposals will be for a group of related standards (even if it is only a Stage 1, 2 and 3 for a particular service). In other cases (e.g., GSM, UMTS), the whole reason for the TB's existence is to produce a full range of standards for a specific communications technology. It is at this point that the basic requirements will first be expressed although they are likely to be at quite a high level (e.g. a secure digital air interface operating in the 1.8GHz waveband) 2 Discussion within TB/WG to determine overall/basic requirements of the standard(s) A smaller group within a TB (usually the Sub-Technical Committee or Working Group where the proposal originated) will spend some time discussing the feasibility of the proposal and will develop further the requirements for the standard(s). These requirements are rarely documented as part of the Work Item itself. If they are recorded at all, it is more usual for them to be presented in a Technical Report as the results of a pre-normative study. Once published, the link between these detailed requirements and the resultant standards can get lost. It would be very unusual for the study report to be used as the basis for subsequent validation of the standard(s). At this stage, there will be tacit agreement on the objectives of the standardization work but a consensus commitment is not normally sought. 3 Agreement on Scope of standard Before the Work Item can be approved and raised, the Scope of the work should be written and agreed. This should be the text that will later appear in the "Scope" clause of the resultant standard but, unfortunately, it is more often only one or two sentences giving the briefest outline of the work. The following items of information should be present in some form in the Scope: - Subject of the standard - Purpose and objective of the standard - Area of applicability of the standard - Purpose of the product or service being standardized - Limitations of the content or application of the standard - The existence of any major implementation option(s) contained in the standard - The relationship of the standard with other standards - The capabilities or limitations of upwards compatibility 4 Generation of ETSI Work Item with the support of at least 4 full members An official Work Item needs to be raised and approved before development of the standard can proceed any further. The WI will be actively supported by at least 4 full members of ETSI (i.e., each should be willing to provide effort to write, validate or review the standard). At this point, the Scope is set in concrete and is rarely re- visited to determine whether it remains valid. 5 Allocation of WI to a rapporteur or STF Responsibility for the actual development of the standard is allocated to a member of the committee (the rapporteur). It may not be this person that produces the draft but the rapporteur accepts responsibility for progressing the work. In most cases, the rapporteur will be one of the members that submitted the original proposal. If the skills and/or effort for the work is unavailable within the committee, it is possible that a request will be made to the ETSI Board for funding to have the standard developed by a Specialist Task Force (STF). 6 Development of schedule The last task in raising the Work Item request is the completion of schedule details which enable the deliverable (standard) to be tracked through its various phases. 7 Start of work The serious work of developing the standard can now begin. This will either take place at ETSI within a STF or by volunteers working at their home offices. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 10 No. Step Description 8 Ongoing development of draft content The draft content of a standard may contain text, tables, diagrams, formal specifications such as SDL, TTCN, MSC and ASN.1 or, more often, a combination of a number of these. Draft inputs are often produced by a number of contributors and the process may take many months to complete. 9 Regular reviews of drafts at WG meetings or by e-mail An important part of the standard development process is to have the draft contents reviewed by interested and knowledgeable but reasonably independent individuals to ensure that the original requirements are being met and that the draft would be usable as a standard. 10 Formal validation if possible and desirable Where formal notations are being used within a standard (even if they are not the normative part), tool-based validation of the specification model can be carried out. This can require the provision of time and other resources by the members of the responsible WG. 11 Consideration of draft at WG When the rapporteur considers the draft to be essentially complete and stable, it will be reviewed for a final time by the WG to determine whether it is possible to give it their approval. The WG should be concerned mainly about the technical content of the draft. 12 Revision of draft if required If the WG identifies any errors in the document, the rapporteur will ensure that these are rectified. 13 WG approval When all of the required modifications have been made to the draft standard, the WG approves it and passes it to the TB for their consideration. 14 Consideration of draft at TB The members of the TB should review the draft standard to determine whether it is possible for them to give it their approval. Although the TB should review the technical content of the draft standard, it should mainly be concerned with the "political" issues of the requirements expressed in the draft. 15 Further revision of text if required If the TB identifies any errors in the document, the rapporteur will ensure that these are rectified. 16 TB approval When all of the required modifications have been made to the draft standard, the TB approves it and passes it to the Secretariat to process through the necessary external approvals. 17 External approval process (MV/PE…) Before they can have any validity, draft standards will be given external approval either by the ETSI membership (Member Approval Procedure, MAP) or by public consultation through the National Standards Organizations, NSOs, responsible for telecommunication standards in each of ETSI's member states (Two-step Approval Procedure, TAP or One-step Approval Procedure, OAP). 18 Resolution of comments At the end of the external approval process, any comments received are assessed by the WG and/or TB. Those that are reasonable are accepted and the rapporteur is given responsibility for ensuring that the appropriate changes to the standard are made. The WG will be required to review and subsequently approve the changes if the changes are not substantial. If however, there are a significant number of changes required to the draft document, it may be necessary to repeat the approvals processes (steps 11 to 17). 19 Publication When all approvals have been gained, the standard can be published by the Secretariat. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3 Introduction to Object-Orientation (OO) | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.1 The Unified Modelling Language (UML) | The Unified Modelling Language (UML) is a language for visualizing, specifying, constructing and documenting software systems and has been developed using best practices from existing object-oriented methods. It is standardized by Industry in the Object Management Group (OMG). The UML uses diagrams to visualize the structures of a system in a way that transcends the textual description. The notation used in the UML has well-defined (though incomplete) syntax & semantics which are specified by OMG [12]. It can be used to specify the artefacts and decisions of analysis, design and implementation of a software-intensive architecture. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 11 Both forward and reverse engineering are possible with the UML. Code can, at least to some degree, be generated from a UML model and a model can be reconstructed from an implementation. At a high level, it is also possible to simulate a UML system. However, more formal definition of the system's behaviour is necessary before it can be simulated fully. There are ongoing activities in OMG to extend the language in this area and these are discussed in subclause 4.3.2 of the present document. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.1.1 The Architecture of a System | The architecture of a software-intensive system can have five interlocking views: - the Use Case view: specifies the forces that shape the system's architecture and describes the behaviour of the system as seen by its users, analysts and testers; - the Design view: collects the vocabulary (as classes, interfaces and collaborations) of the problem and its solution and shows the functional requirements of the system; - the Process view: concentrates on the performance, scalability and throughput of the system and presents the threads and processes; - the Implementation view: presents components that are used to assemble the system and can be used in the configuration management of the system; - the Deployment view: shows the nodes that form the system’s topology and on which the system executes. The relationship between these views is shown in Figure 1 (source: The Unified Modelling Language User Guide [20]). Process View Design View Deployment View Implementation View Use Case View system topology distribution delivery installation performance scaleability throughput behaviour system assembly configuration management vocabulary functionality Figure 1: Relationship between views of a system |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.1.2 A Conceptual Model of the UML | The UML has three major elements: - a set of basic building blocks: ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 12 - things; - relationships; - diagrams. - a set of rules for assembling these blocks; - some common mechanisms (for example, to extend the UML notation). |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.1.2.1 Building Blocks of the UML | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.1.2.1.1 Things | The UML defines four different types of "thing": - structural things: the nouns of a UML model. These are the static parts of a model and they represent conceptual elements of a system. Classes, interfaces, collaborations, use cases, active classes, components and nodes are structural things in the UML; - behavioural things: the verbs of a UML model. These have behaviour over time and space. Interactions and state machines are basic behavioural things in the UML; - grouping things: the organizational parts of the UML. Packages are currently the only grouping things in the UML; - annotational things: the explanatory parts of the UML. Notes are currently the only annotational things in the UML. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.1.2.1.2 Relationships | The UML supports four kinds of basic relationships as follows: - dependency: a semantic relationship between two things. A change to one thing may affect the other; - association: a structural relationship. An aggregation, which is a special kind of association, represents the relationship between a whole and its constituent parts; - generalization: a specialization/generalization relationship in which objects of the specialized element are substitutable for objects of the generalized element. The child shares the structure and the behaviour of its parent; - realization: a semantic relationship between elements. One element specifies a contract that another element carries out. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.1.2.1.3 Diagrams | A diagram is a graphical presentation of a set of elements. UML has nine different diagrams which can be used to provide different views of a system's architecture. Diagrams are classified as either structural or behavioural diagrams. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 13 4.3.1.2.1.3.1Structural diagrams A class diagram (see the example in Figure 2) shows a set of classes, interfaces and collaborations and their relationships, such as a generalization or a realization. Class diagrams illustrate the static design view of a system. Funct iona l entity <<Interface>> Fe1 Fe2 Fe3 Fe4 Fe5 Call co ntrol Call control agent class generalization interface real iza ti on Figure 2: An example of a UML Class Diagram An object diagram shows a set of objects and their relationships. Object diagrams illustrate static snapshots of instances of the classes. A component diagram shows a set of components and their relationships. Component diagrams illustrate the static implementation view of a system. Figure 3 shows a simple example of a component diagram with four different components where one of these (Call control) is dependent on another (the Call control agent) Network Terminal Call control Call c ontrol agent com ponent dependency Figure 3: An example of a UML Component Diagram ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 14 A deployment diagram shows a set of nodes and their relationships. Deployment diagrams, as shown in Figure 4, illustrate a static deployment view of an architecture. Devic e Rerouting P INX CTM I-Detec t P INX Home P INX Visitor PINX Connection Figure 4: An example of a UML Deployment Diagram 4.3.1.2.1.3.2Behavioural diagrams A use case diagram shows a set of actors and use cases and the relationships between them. Use case diagrams, such as the one shown in Figure 5, illustrate the static use case view of a system. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 15 actor use case association Cordless terminal Service access agent <<call control agent functional entity>> Routing inform ation provicion << functional entity >> Visited location control and execution <<call control functional entity>> rc <<use>> Incoming call detection and control <<call control functional entity>> rb <<use>> Incoming c all ex ecution <<call control functional entity>> rc <<use>> ra <<use>> Telecom munic ation Network Figure 5: An example of a UML Use Case Diagram Sequence diagrams illustrate the dynamic view of a system. As can be seen from the example in Figure 6, a sequence diagram shows a set of objects and the messages sent and received by those objects. It also emphasizes the time ordering of messages. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 16 : Fe1 : Fe2 : Fe3 : Fe4 : Fe5 setup(req.ind) enquire(req.ind) enquire(req.conf) divert(req.ind) divert(req.conf) inform(req.ind) release(req.ind) inform(req.ind) setup(resp.conf) setup(req.ind) setup(resp.conf) setup(resp.conf) obj ect m essage Figure 6: An example of a UML Sequence Diagram Collaboration diagrams also illustrate the dynamic view of a system and are semantically equivalent to sequence diagrams. A collaboration diagram shows a set of objects, the links between those objects and the messages sent and received by them. It emphasizes the structural organization of the objects that send and receive messages. The collaboration diagram shown in Figure 7 is a different view of the dynamic situation shown in the sequence diagram in Figure 6. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 17 : Fe1 : Fe2 : Fe3 : Fe4 : Fe5 message link object 1: setup(req.ind) 5: divert(req.conf) 6: release(req.ind) 4: divert(req.ind) 7: inform(req.ind) 11: setup(resp.conf) 12: setup(resp.conf) 2: enquire(req.ind) 3: enquire(req.conf) 8: inform(req.ind) 9: setup(req.ind) 10: setup(resp.conf) Figure 7: An example of a UML Collaboration Diagram Statechart diagrams illustrate the dynamic view of a system. A statechart diagram shows a state machine, comprising states, transitions, events and activities. It emphasizes the event-ordered behaviour of an object. The example in Figure 8 shows how a simple process can be represented in a UML statechart. ANF-CTMI Idle Wait for ENQUIRE response CTM incoming call request ^FE3.ENQUIRE req.ind Wait for DIVERT response ENQUIRE resp.conf( accepted ) ^FE1.DIVERT req.ind ENQUIRE resp.conf( rejected ) ^Caller.Release basic call DIVERT resp.conf( rejected ) ^Caller.Release basic call DIVERT resp.conf( accepted ) state transition Figure 8: An example of a UML Statechart Diagram Activity diagrams illustrate the flow of control among objects within a system. An activity diagram shows a set of activities, the sequential or branching flow from each activity to the next and objects that act and are acted upon. An example of a UML activity diagram can be seen in Figure 10. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 18 4.3.1.2.1.3.3Rules of UML Within the UML there are semantic rules defined for: - naming: identifies things, relationships and diagrams; - scope: provides the context to give specific meaning to a name; - visibility: describes how names can be seen and used by others; - integrity: describes how things relate to one another properly and consistently; - execution: provides the ability to run or simulate a dynamic model at a high level. 4.3.1.2.1.3.4Common mechanisms in the UML The UML has the following four common mechanisms that can be applied consistently: - specifications: Every part of the UML graphical notation has a specification that provides a textual statement of the syntax and semantics of that building block; - adornments: Every element of the UML has a basic symbol to which graphical or textual adornments specific to that symbol can be added; - common divisions: In object-orientation, there are two common divisions: - class and object; - interface and implementation; - extensibility mechanisms: It is possible in the UML to extend the language in controlled ways to permit the expression of a wide range of possible nuances of models across all domains. The UML's extensibility mechanisms are illustrated in Figure 9 and include: - stereotypes which extend the vocabulary of the UML, allowing the creation of new kinds of building blocks that are derived from the existing ones. - tagged values which extend the properties of a UML building block, thereby making it possible to add new information to an element's specification. - constraints which extend the semantics of a UML building block to allow the addition of new rules or the modification of existing ones. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 19 <<ErrorCase>> User Not Known {ordered} Mobile Data Base {type = cordless} Locate() Re-Locate() Delete() stereotype tagged value constraint Figure 9: Examples of extensibility mechanisms |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.2 OMG standardization | The Object Management Group (OMG), established in 1989, is a world-wide software consortium whose goal is to introduce object-oriented standards to the software industry. The OMG is producing standardized specifications which aim to define an object-oriented framework for distributed applications. The main achievement to date is the release of the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) platform [15] for distributed object programming. As part of this environment, an Object Management Architecture (OMA) has been defined, providing the necessary interfaces, services and protocols to program a distributed application. As a complementary feature to the OMA, the OMG has standardized the UML [12], which is a general purpose modelling language for object analysis and design of software systems. The continuous development of the UML is monitored by the Analysis and Design Platform Task Force within the Platform Technology Committee. The work of this task force, as that of other OMG task forces, is to clarify, amend or complement an adopted OMG specification. For this purpose, the task force generates Requests for Proposals to OMG members to submit technical proposals on a given subject. These proposals are then evaluated and some iterations take place until a proposal may be recommended for adoption by voting. Work in progress relating to UML includes 2 main subjects addressed by the following Requests For Proposal (RFP): RFP ad/97-12-05 [16] "Stream-based Model Interchange Format": - a stream-based model interchange format (SMIF) to allow the file export/import of UML models. The proposal that has been retained is a format based on the XML language. RFP ad/98-11-01 [17] "Action Semantics for UML": - extension of the UML with an action language that will be used to specify the actions associated with state-chart transitions and the operations in class diagrams. This RFP has been issued to request proposals for the definition of semantics for the action language. The two RFPs above should generate significant benefits for the UML user community. RFP1 will allow users to exchange their models independent of the UML tools used, provided they support the OMG standard for UML. Within the scope of making standards, this feature is very important. RFP2 will introduce missing formality to UML and thus will allow users to conduct early verification of their specification, through, for example, simulation. This feature also is very important for the validation of standards. Moreover in RFP2, it is required that the action semantics for the UML are software-platform independent in order to allow a specification to be implemented with different software technologies. The latter fact should increase reusability of specifications. A few other tentative UML-related RFPs are being investigated by the Real-Time Analysis and Design (RTAD) sub- group, with respect, in particular, to the expression of quantitative features such as the timing constraints and resource consumption in real-time systems (RFP ad/99-03-13[18]). |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.3.3 Standardization of Object Oriented Methods within ITU-T | In working draft Recommendation Z.109 (see Bibliography), "SDL in combination with UML", ITU-T SG10 is studying the possible alignment between the UML and SDL which is defined in ITU-T Recommendation Z.100 [9]. The objective is to define a mapping of UML concepts (possibly a subset) to the SDL language (SDL-2000), so that both notations can be used in combination for system engineering. The expected benefit of this combined approach is to use the full power of UML, especially its expressiveness, for system analysis and the full power of SDL, especially its formality, for system design. It should be noted that the ITU-T Recommendation Z.109 proposal does not address the ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 20 combined use of UML and Message Sequence Charts (MSC) as defined in ITU-T Recommendation Z.120 [11]. Furthermore, ITU-T Recommendation Z.109 is based on the current definition of the UML which lacks action semantics. Therefore, in this combination, only SDL models can be used for simulation, verification and code generation. The basis for the UML-SDL combination is to take advantage of the UML extension mechanisms. The UML-SDL mapping will be realized by using UML stereotypes, tagged values and constraints. The general approach for the mapping is to use UML packages and classes to represent the different sorts of SDL entities. However, only UML concepts that are meaningful in SDL will be supported by the combination as defined in ITU-T Recommendation Z.109. Thus, diagrams such as Collaboration Diagrams or Object Diagrams will not be supported. The solution proposed in ITU-T Recommendation Z.109 should help users already working with older notations, such as SDL, to preserve their investments because tools (on the SDL side) can rely on it to support the migration to the combined UML-SDL solution. Although ITU-T Recommendation Z.109 may appear as a temporary solution because action semantics are being defined for the UML and may be incompatible with ITU-T Recommendation Z.109 mapping, it represents a concrete move for language experts and tool vendors to work together towards defining convergent semantics between the UML and SDL. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4 Case studies of three types of standard | In order to evaluate the possibility of using the UML within the ETSI standardization process, three different types of standard were reviewed as simple case studies. The types of standard considered were: - protocol specifications; - specifications of physical characteristics; - conformance test specifications. NOTE In each case, the application of the UML to a particular type of standard should be treated as an example and should not be considered in any way to be definitive as other approaches may be equally valid. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.1 Protocol | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.1.1 Specifying protocol standards | Because the purpose of a protocol standard is to specify the behaviour of an implementation, i.e., there is some processing involved which is likely to be software-intensive, there is a clear opportunity to use object-orientation in its development. The three stage method for describing communications protocols (see CCITT Recommendation I.130 [8]) already reflects the views supported by the UML, thus: 1) Requirements capture and expression (Stage 1); 2) Functional modelling of the protocol (Stage 2); 3) Detailed description of the behaviour (Stage 3). |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.1.2 Requirements capture | Use cases and use case diagrams with some textual description can be used to capture the initial requirements of a protocol. As the example in Figure 5 shows, they can also help to simplify the communication of requirements between parties by defining them in a common and easily understandable language. Stage 1 standards often use an SDL process chart to provide an overall description of the service in a graphical format. Activity diagrams can be used for the same purpose. Figure 10 shows how an activity diagram could be used to describe the incoming call service for a Cordless Terminal Mobility (CTM) user as described in ETS 300 694 [6]. The activity diagram allows the protocol or service to be described in a more general way than if constrained by the syntax and semantics of SDL which is better suited to the description of more detailed behaviour. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 21 [user's location unknown] [call to mobile user] [call to fixed user] receive incoming call determine user location direct call to CTM user process call normally generate error report [user's location known] Figure 10: Example activity diagram describing CTM incoming call service |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.1.3 Functional modelling | As can be seen in Table 2 and in subclause 4.3, many of the diagrams used in the UML bear a strong resemblance to those already produced for most Stage 2 standards: Table 2: Mapping of Stage 2 and UML diagrams Stage 2 diagram UML equivalent functional entity model use case & object diagram relationship with basic service class & collaboration diagrams information flow diagram sequence diagram In addition, class diagrams can be used to specify information and function entities in the standardized system and state diagrams could be used effectively instead of the Stage 2 SDL process descriptions to describe the general behaviour of the service (see Figure 8). |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.1.4 Detailed description | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.1.4.1 Behaviour specification | Protocol behaviour can be specified using sequence, collaboration, or statechart diagrams. However, without agreed and proven action semantics, the UML cannot offer the simulation and validation capabilities of SDL and is unlikely to be able to replace it as the language of choice for the specification of normative behaviour. Current SDL tools support a transition between UML and SDL within a single specification. This will make the combined use of the two languages a genuine possibility where such an approach is likely to bring added benefits in the accuracy and understandability of a protocol standard. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.1.4.2 Data specification | It is possible to specify protocol information elements using class diagrams in a similar way to that shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12 for physical characteristics. However, the UML's lack of encoding rules makes this approach less attractive than the use of ASN.1 in specifying protocol data elements which can be sent, received and understood by a range of implementations from different manufacturers. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 22 |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.2 Test specification | When testing the implementation of a specification, a number of tests on different layers have to be performed. On the bottom layer, conformance to physical specifications is tested; on the top layers, there are interoperability and network integration tests. ETSI has accepted some test suites for these layers as standards (e.g. ETS 300 012-4 [21] ), but they are not usually developed within ETSI. For the middle layers, protocol tests are specified and this is where ETSI actively produces conformance test suites. Thus, within the remainder of this section, the consideration of UML is limited to its use and possible benefits in the specification of protocol tests. ISO/IEC 9646-3 [7] defines a test notation, the Tree and Tabular Combined Notation (TTCN) within the Conformance Testing Methodology and Framework (CTMF). A test suite consists of a number of test cases which are collected into test groups according to common characteristics (e.g., valid / invalid behaviour test). Test cases usually comprise a number of test steps and a test body. Unexpected behaviour is handled by at least one default test step. The essential part of every test case and test step is its behaviour description. TTCN defines basic test events for sending and receiving signals. Timers are managed with special operations to start, check and cancel timers. The corresponding timeout is also a test event. Distributed testing is supported through the concurrent TTCN extension. A test system can consist of a number of test components. The connections between test components and from test components to the System Under Test (SUT) are described with test component configurations. Other specifications included in a test suite are, for example, type and constraints declarations, or Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT) statements. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.2.1 Feasibility of using the UML for test specification | With the CTMF and various additional ETSI guidelines, an extensive and proven methodology exists for writing TTCN test specifications. At the moment, there is no need to change this methodology to one that incorporates the UML. The main technical reason for this is that the UML currently lacks many features needed for testing, most notably, timer support. Nevertheless, the UML may be considered for use within the test specification process in two regards: 1) to give a visual representation of certain test suite aspects, thereby increasing the test specification readability; 2) to derive test purposes from a UML protocol specification. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.2.1.1 Using the UML to increase test specification readability | ETSI test purpose specifications are usually given as textual descriptions in tables which contain the following rows: - name; - reference; - purpose; - description; - pass criteria; - selection; - preamble; - postamble. Sometimes, informal MSCs are used to provide high level test behaviour descriptions in a graphical form. Detailed MSCs which are used for automatic test generation may be provided as an annex to the test purpose specification document. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 23 Below is a list of the possible uses of the UML to complement the textual descriptions of test purposes. The main goal of using the UML should be to simplify the understanding of the relations between test cases and test steps (preambles and postambles) by providing a graphical view of these relations. - Test purposes can be modelled as class declarations. The text which is included in the test purpose tables can be put in additional named compartments. - Preambles and postambles can be attached to a test purpose declaration through a dependency relationship. - Test grouping can be modelled using a hierarchy of packages. - Test component configurations for concurrent TTCN can be specified in deployment diagrams. Another possibility would be to use UML sequence diagrams instead of MSCs for the test behaviour description. At the moment, this is not feasible as current tools for automatic test generation depend on an MSC test behaviour description. Furthermore, sequence diagrams are not (yet) feature compatible with MSCs. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.2.1.2 Deriving test purposes from a UML protocol specification | From a high-level, modelling point of view, test cases seem to be equivalent to UML use cases. Use cases represent the required interactions between a system and actors which are outside the system itself. It is very probable that during testing, an implementation will be checked to ensure that it meets all of the requirements. Therefore, if use cases are defined during the requirements analysis phase of the protocol specification then these use cases may be used as a starting point for test purpose specification. In a later protocol specification stage, processes might be specified as classes with methods corresponding to signals sent to a process. The list of methods, again, may be the basis for test purpose identification. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.3 Specification of physical characteristics | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.3.1 Standards specifying physical characteristics | Although specifications related to protocols make up the largest part of ETSI's output of standards, there are also many which specify requirements for the physical characteristics of an item claiming conformance to the standard. Such characteristics include power consumption, electromagnetic radiation, safe access to dangerous voltages and a range of transmission parameters. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.3.2 Open Network Provision (ONP) leased lines | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.3.2.1 ONP standards | To assess the feasibility and possible benefits of using object orientation in the development of this type of standard, the range of specifications defining the connection characteristics of the digital Open Network Provision (ONP) leased lines was considered. These standards are: - ETS 300 247 [1] 2 048 kbit/s digital unstructured leased lines (D2048U); - ETS 300 289 [2] 64 kbit/s digital unrestricted leased line with octet integrity (D64U); - ETS 300 419 [3] 2 048 kbit/s digital structured leased lines (D2048S); - ETS 300 687 [4] 34 Mbit/s digital leased lines (D34U and D34S); - ETS 300 688 [5] 140 Mbit/s digital leased lines (D140U and D140S). There is no behaviour specified in any of these standards so there is little benefit in trying to derive sequence diagrams, collaboration diagrams and statecharts. However, since the same set of parameters need to be specified for each leased line type, it is possible to consider class and object diagrams. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 24 |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.3.2.2 Traditional specification of leased line characteristics | These standards already use a loose form of object-orientation by specifying the characterizing parameters of each leased line type in a table of standard entries as shown in Table 3. Table 3: Table of empty connection attributes Connection type attributes Value Description Nature Reference subclause Information transfer rate Information transfer susceptance Structure Establishment of communication Symmetry Communication configuration Network performance sub-attributes Connection type attributes Value Description Nature Reference subclause Transmission delay Jitter Octet slip Error parameters Time interval with errored blocks Value Description Nature Reference subclause Errored seconds Severely errored It can be considered that this table describes in simple terms an ONP Leased Line "class" and that the individual standards instantiate the class by giving values to the attributes to create particular leased line "objects". Table 4 shows how the table is completed in ETS 300 289 [2] to characterize the 64 kbit/s unrestricted leased line with octet integrity (D64U). Table 4: Completed table of connection attributes for 64 kbit/s unrestricted leased line Connection type attributes Value Description Nature Reference subclause Information transfer rate 64 kbit/s See 5.1.1 Information transfer susceptance Unrestricted digital See 5.1.2 Structure Octet integrity See 5.1.3 Establishment of communication Without user intervention See 5.1.4 Symmetry Symmetrical in both directions See 5.1.5 Communication configuration Point-to-point See 5.1.6 Network performance sub-attributes Connection type attributes Value Description Nature Reference subclause Transmission delay Terrestrial and satellite options See 5.1.7.1 Jitter Input and output ports See 5.1.7.2 Octet slip 5 per 24 hour period See 5.1.7.3 Error parameters Time interval with errored blocks Value Description Nature Reference subclause Errored seconds 5 324 per 24 hour period See 5.1.7.4.1 Severely errored seconds 105 per 24 hour period See 5.1.7.4.2 |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.3.2.3 Use of UML to specify leased line characteristics | There are a number of ways in which this information might have been shown using UML rather than tables and Figure 11 indicates one such method. The 'Leased Line' class is shown as an aggregation of the 'Connection Type', 'Network Performance Sub-Attributes' and 'Error Parameters' classes each of which posses attributes which relate exactly to those in the three sections of the table. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 25 Connection Type Information Transfer Rate : Rate Type Information Transfer Susceptance : Susceptance Type Structure : Structure Type Establishment of Communication : Establishment Type Symmetry : Symmetry Type Communication Configuration : Configuration Type Network Performance Sub-Attributes Transmission Delay : DelayType Jitter : JitterType Slip : SlipType Error Parameters Errored Seconds per 24hr : Integer Severely Errored Seconds per 24hr : Integer Leased Line Figure 11: UML specification of an ONP Leased Line Class On its own, this diagram does not add any additional information to that shown in Table 3 but by qualifying each of the attributes with a type, it is possible to use a further class diagram to constrain the attributes to a range of specific values. As can be seen in Figure 12, each of the types has been specified as a <<parameter type>> stereotype which is the aggregation of one of a range <<permitted value>> stereotypes. For example, any attribute of parameter type 'Structure Type' can have the value "Frame Integrity", "Octet Integrity" or "Unstructured" and no other. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 26 Octet Integrity <<permitted value>> Frame Integrity <<permitted value>> Unstructured <<permitted value>> Structure Type <<parameter type>> Symmetrical In Both Directions <<permitted value>> Symmetry Type 139 264 kbit/s <<permitted value>> 139 240 kbit/s <<permitted value>> 2 048 kbit/s <<permitted value>> 1 984 kbit/s <<permitted value>> 64 kbit/s <<permitted value>> Rate Type {xor} {xor} Point-to-Point <<permitted value>> Configuration Type <<parameter type>> With User Intervention <<permitted value>> Without User Intervention <<permitted value>> Establishment Type {xor} <<parameter type>> Unrestricted Digital <<permitted value>> Susceptance Type <<parameter type>> <<parameter type>> <<parameter type>> Figure 12: UML Specification of value ranges for Connection Type attributes Having specified a general class of ONP Leased Line, it is then straightforward to create an instance of this class for each specific leased line type. Figure 13 shows an example of how a definition of the D64U leased line can be expressed as an instance of the Leased Line class. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 27 :Network Performance Sub-Attributes Transmission Delay : Terrestial and satellite Jitter : Input and output ports Slip : 5 per 24 hour period :Connection Type Information Transfer Rate :64 kbit/s Information Transfer Susceptance : Unrestricted digital Structure : Octet integrity Establishment of Communication : Without user intervention Symmetry : Symmetrical in both directions Communication Configuration : Point-to-Point D64U: Leased Line Errored Seconds per 24hr :5324 Severely Errored Seconds per 24hr : 105 :Error Parameters Figure 13: Object instance of D64U Leased Line |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.4.3.2.4 Summary | Without developing this model further, it is clear that the UML could be of some value in the early stages of developing standards of this type specifying physical characteristics. However, it is also arguable that the tabular presentation used in the ONP Leased Line standards is adequate for their intended use and that a more complex presentation method might require unnecessary explanation of its syntax and semantics to enable the readers to benefit fully from it. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5 Tool support | In the standard making process at ETSI, a number of requirements for using new methods (such as the UML) and tools should be met. They are: - the ability to interface to existing methods & standards (MSC, SDL, TTCN, ASN.1) already in use; - the availability of tool support and a common exchange format; - graphical analysis and design notations. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1 Current situation | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.1 OO notations for industry | Current trends in specification techniques show that industry needs methods and tools for the following reasons: ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 28 - to automate the production of software; - to improve its quality; - to manage system complexity; - to model the system at a high-level independently of any implementation. Before UML emerged, there were several OO modelling languages having many concepts and various different interpretations. The inherent incompatibility of these languages was the main criticism from users wanting to adopt an OO modelling approach. They wanted a modelling language whose foundations are managed by both users and tool vendors in order to guarantee an agreed general purpose OO formalism. On the tool vendor’s side, the main requirement was to have a unique language semantics which fully supports an OO modelling notation. This would allow them to provide tools for model animation and verification. In addition, the impossibility of having a unique format for the exchange of OO models was seen as a restriction in the development of tool support. Obviously, there is a substantial cost induced by using and supporting various modelling environments. All these many reasons have led to a widespread consensus for UML as the convergent OO technology. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.2 Standardization and industrialization of UML | UML unifies different modelling languages by suppressing many of the differences and redundancies. OMG's specification documents and technical papers are being elaborated continuously to provide a primary source for experts as well as for developers of supporting tools, e.g. modelling tools. OMG support is a fundamental factor in the survival and success of UML as the industry standard object modelling language. It guarantees that, unlike the Booch or OMT languages in the past, UML will not evolve simply by following fashion or current market trends. OMG's process is rigorous, working through from RFP to Recommendation, Amendment and Adoption Vote. Although it does not prevent the making of mistakes or the influence of lobbying groups, it ensures some kind of positive inertia that is of overall benefit to the evolution of the language. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3 Tool support for UML | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3.1 UML-based tools | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3.1.1 Support for standard UML | One of the most widely-used UML tools on the market today is Rational Rose from the Rational Software Corporation. Rose supports IS development using the UML notation for the specification and description of systems. It implements a large subset of the UML concepts including UML interfaces and diagrams, propagation of changes from one view to another, provision of capabilities for reverse engineering, and good document generation with links to requirements. Other existing tools which offer similar capabilities to Rational Rose are as follows: - SelectEnterprise from Select Software; - Paradigm Plus from Platinum Technologies; - Software through Pictures from Aonix; - Prosa/om from Prosa Software. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3.1.2 Support for extended UML | The current UML notation is missing several of the concepts necessary for the high-level design of real-time systems. The Real-Time Object-Oriented Modelling language (ROOM) which is similar to the UML, offers an alternative to these limitations. However, in Rational's ObjectTime tool which supports ROOM, actions are interpreted in the statechart diagrams and missing concepts such as time constraints are added by proprietary means. These notions have yet to become part of UML and adopted by the OMG. Other existing UML-based tools that support proprietary extensions for real-time characteristics are: ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 29 - ARTiSAN from Artisan Software; - COOL:Jex from Sterling Software; - Rhapsody from I-Logix. As with any proprietary extension to a standardized language, there is always a risk that these solutions may not be compatible with the extensions that are ultimately adopted for the UML standard. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3.2 SDL-UML based tools | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3.2.1 Telelogic Tau | Telelogic includes support for some UML diagrams in its Tau tool set. Specifically, class diagrams and statechart diagrams can be drawn with the Tau graphical editor. The tool set also provides means for forward engineering from UML to SDL: Classes can be translated into different kinds of type or process definitions. Class attributes are converted to SDL variable declarations, while class operations are translated into procedure references. Statecharts in turn can be converted into SDL process descriptions. Through the support of the UML, Telelogic provides an integrated development environment from requirements analysis through system specification down to target implementation. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3.2.2 Verilog ObjectGEODE | Verilog provides extensions, such as a class diagram editor, to its ObjectGEODE tool to support a combined UML-SDL design path. Within the tool, UML is used for high-level modelling and SDL is then used for detailed design and simulation. In a complementary approach, Verilog has developed a direct interface to the Rose tool called ObjectGEODE RoseLink. Developers are able to import into the SDL environment UML analysis models realized with Rose. Object class names, instances and their attributes are then accessible from within the ObjectGEODE internal dictionary and can be used to complete the detailed design with SDL. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.1.3.3 Tool summary | To summarize, it can be said that reasonable tool support exists for the UML, although a common interchange format has yet to be implemented. The forward engineering capabilities of existing tools, such as mapping between UML and SDL, are limited. This aspect should be greatly improved when more precise semantics are defined for the UML notation. The incomplete action semantics of UML makes it difficult for an automatic tool to support animation and interpretation of models for the purpose of verification and prototyping. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.2 What is needed | |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.2.1 UML features for strong tool support | From a tool support point of view, a suitable UML notation should: - allow users to exchange meaningful visual models the tools should support a common interchange format; - provide for new integration between tools, processes and domains in particular the tools should support the extensibility mechanisms (e.g. tags and stereotypes) so that the user can enhance the notation; - stay independent of any programming language or development process the tools should be able to generate different kinds of implementation from an UML model; - provide a formal semantics to simplify the understanding and implementing the modelling language the tools should be able to provide consistent support for checking, simulation and verification; - extend the use of OO modelling to a wide application area ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 30 tool support for the extensibility mechanisms should allow the specialization of concepts and constraints for particular application domains; - be adopted by many users as a result of the OMG standard definition tool vendors should address a large and stable market; |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.2.2 Standardization framework for UML | As part of its mission, the OMG defines new standards for software engineering that allow the modelling of the real world through the representation of objects. Thus, initial design functionality can easily be expanded by, for example, extending some components or adding new objects to the system. This object engineering approach promoted by OMG offers faster application development and improved maintainability as well as producing reusable software. In order to achieve these targets, the OMG is developing the necessary standard specifications, in particular: - UML [12] to facilitate the understanding of complex models and interoperability between various CASE tools, - MOF [13] to define a standard repository metamodel (used to represent the UML metamodel), - XMI [14] to facilitate the exchange of information e.g. UML models between various CASE tools, - CORBA [15] to support distributed object environments ensuring interoperability between different SW and/or HW platforms. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.2.3 Action semantics for UML | The provision of an action semantics for UML is the subject of a current RFP aimed at extending UML by the definition of consistent action semantics for statechart transitions and method bodies in the objects. For the UML tool providers, this will allow them to develop verification tools such as simulators to validate the specification. Code generators and other tools are also likely to benefit from the definition of precise semantics. For the UML specifiers, the action semantics will guarantee that they are making models which are: - interoperable; - can be exchanged between different UML tools; - have a behaviour that will be interpreted the same way by every simulator. However it will be noted that, at a first stage, the action semantics are only likely to be optional for UML models so that a tool vendor may not support the action semantics but will still be compliant with UML. Formally defining the meaning of the actions and operations used in UML models will provide for a unique interpretation of the behaviour of the model by all the supporting tools, thus facilitating their interoperability. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.2.4 XMI interchange format for UML | XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) is a proposal to an OMG RFP on Stream-based Model Interchange Format (SMIF). The purpose of SMIF is to allow the interchange of models and thus the interchange of information between UML modelling tools and/or metadata repositories based on the OMG MOF standard. It should be stressed that XMI is a transfer format, i.e., any data repository or tool that can encode and decode XMI streams can exchange metadata with other repositories or tools with the same capability. XMI will allow developers of distributed systems to exchange object models and other metadata in the form of streams or files with a standard format based on XML (the eXtensible Markup Language, a W3C standard for the Internet). |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.2.5 Tool interoperability and model extensibility | A combination of tools from different vendors is often necessary to design a system and to document the developed models and programs. However, in practice, such combinations are difficult to achieve because of poor interchange capabilities which require translation or manual re-entry of information, with the inherent risk of loss and error. XMI tackles the problem of tool interoperability by providing a flexible and parsable information interchange format. Thus, a ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 31 tool needs only to be able to save and load the data it uses in XMI format in order to interoperate with other XMI capable tools. The extent of information that can be exchanged between two tools is limited by how much of the information can be understood by both tools. If both share the same metamodel, all of the information transferred can be understood and used. In practice, it is likely that only a subset of the metamodel may be shared, with each tool adding its own extensions. Moreover, having a shared model is not enough on its own. Each tool vendor needs to be able to extend the information content of the model to include pieces of information that have not been included in the shared model. XMI allows a vendor to attach additional information to shared definitions in a way that allows the information to be preserved and passed through a tool that does not understand the information. Using the extension mechanism, an XMI stream can be passed from tool to tool without any information loss. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 4.5.2.6 SDL-UML alignment and tool support | In respect of ETSI's needs in the standard making process, the mission of a tool manufacturer is to provide its customers with integrated solutions and tools that enhance their productivity, reduce time-to-market and improve the quality of their software. The basic principles of the UML definition meet these needs. Reliance on standards is a key part of such a strategy as can be seen from the tool support for SDL, MSC, TTCN or OMT. Moreover, in this context, UML is an emerging standard that provides a smooth evolution of OMT. Thus the UML technology has become a strategic direction for vendors of tools dedicated to the development of distributed intensive software systems. To enable industrial customers to preserve their investments made with other notations such as OMT, MSC, SDL and TTCN, the tool vendors will support a smooth migration from these notations to the UML solution. It is essential that they work together in order to converge on compatible semantics as far as possible. |
7bacf70a4dd0b8f943de5e517835b45e | 102 105 | 5 Conclusions | It was not obvious from the summary in Table 1 how and where object orientation would fit into the overall ETSI standards-making process. However, by studying the potential use of the UML in the three most significant types of standard (protocol specifications, the definition of physical characteristics and the specification of test suites) it is clear that object-orientation based on this language could be used within the ETSI standards-making process. Use of the UML should, in many cases, provide additional benefits to those achieved with the methods currently in use. The greatest benefits of using the UML are likely to be realized at the earlier stages of standards development as the language excels in the formalization and expression of requirements but currently lacks the precision and maturity of other notations such as SDL, ASN.1 and TTCN. Although object-oriented methods (mainly GDMO) have traditionally been used in the specification of telecommunications network management services, they have rarely been used in other areas of standardization. To make the best use of the UML across the full spectrum of ETSI's activities, there would need to be a significant change in the general methodology of standards-making such that the overall process becomes "requirements-based" rather than "results-based". In the first instance, the UML could be used as a background tool without any of its constituent diagrams ever appearing in published standards. Such use of the UML within this methodology would, in itself, yield considerable benefits. Support of the UML in automatic tools is growing fast and, most importantly, is already available in the established SDL tools although they do not offer the full range of UML diagrams. Other tools dedicated solely to the UML are available but few of these support the complete graphical set. However, the tools are likely to grow with the language such that a lack of tool capability is unlikely to hamper the use of the UML by ETSI. With a formal graphical language such as the UML, it is essential that a simple set of guidelines is available to standards writers in order to realize the full range of benefits that are available through the intelligent and consistent use of the language. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 32 Annex A (informative): Useful WWW addresses The following URLs can be accessed for further information on UML publications and tools: The Object Management Group http://www.omg.org Verilog http://www.verilogusa.com Telelogic http://www.telelogic.se Rational Software Corporation http://www.rational.com Select Software http://www.selectst.com Platinum Technologies http://www.platinum.com Aonix Software http://www.aonix.com Prosa Software http://www.prosa.fi Artisan Software http://www.artisansw.com Sterling Software http://www.sterling.com I-Logix http://www.ilogix.com ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 33 Bibliography The following material, though not specifically referenced in the body of the present document (or not publicly available), gives supporting information. - ITU-T Recommendation Z.109: "SDL in combination with UML". - Schneider & Winters: "Applying Use Cases", Addison-Wesley (1998), ISBN 0-201-3-981-5. - Jacobsen, Booch & Rumbaugh: "The Unified Software Development Process", Addison-Wesley (1999), ISBN 0-201-57169-2. ETSI ETSI TR 102 105 V1.1.1 (1999-08) 34 History Document history V1.1.1 August 1999 Publication ISBN 2-7437-3267-9 Dépôt légal : Août 1999 |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 1 Scope | The present document specifies interoperability Test Descriptions (TDs) for Inter-IMS Network to Network Interface (II-NNI) interoperability testing for the IP Multimedia Call Control Protocol based on Stage 3 Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol (SDP) standard, TS 124 229 [1]. Interconnection aspects between two different IM CN subsystems for end to end service interoperability are based on standard TS 129 165 [16]. TDs have been specified on the basis of the Test Purposes (TPs) and Test Suite Structure (TSS) presented in TS 186 011-1 [2]. TP fragments presented in the present document as part of TDs are defined using the TPLan notation of ES 202 553 [5]. TDs have been written based on the test specification framework described in TS 102 351 [3] and the interoperability testing methodology defined in TS 102 237-1 [4], i.e. interoperability testing with a conformance relation. For the assessment of IMS core network requirements related to the ISC interface parts of the supplementary services HOLD (see TS 124 410 [10]), CDIV (see TS 124 404 [11]), ACR-CB (see TS 124 411 [12]), and OIP/OIR (see TS 124 407 [13]) have been used. The scope of these test descriptions is not to cover all requirements specified in TS 124 229 [1]. TDs have been only specified for requirements that are observable at the interface between two IMS core network implementations, i.e. IMS NNI. NOTE: Requirements pertaining to a UE or an AS implementation or IMS core network requirements that can only be observed at the interface between UE and IMS CN are explicitly not within the scope of the present document. The latter requirements have been dealt with from a UE and conformance perspective in TS 134 229-1 [6]. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 2 References | References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or non-specific. For specific references, only the cited version applies. For non-specific references, the latest version of the reference document (including any amendments) applies. Referenced documents which are not found to be publicly available in the expected location might be found at http://docbox.etsi.org/Reference. NOTE: While any hyperlinks included in this clause were valid at the time of publication ETSI cannot guarantee their long term validity. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 2.1 Normative references | The following referenced documents are necessary for the application of the present document. [1] ETSI TS 124 229 (V9.5.0): "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; IP multimedia call control protocol based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol (SDP); Stage 3 (3GPP TS 24.229 version 9.5.0 Release 9)". [2] ETSI TS 186 011-1 (V4.1.3): "IMS Network Testing (INT); IMS NNI Interoperability Test Specifications; Part 1: Test Purposes for IMS NNI Interoperability". [3] ETSI TS 102 351: "Methods for Testing and Specification (MTS); Internet Protocol Testing (IPT); IPv6 Testing: Methodology and Framework". [4] ETSI TS 102 237-1: "Telecommunications and Internet Protocol Harmonization Over Networks (TIPHON) Release 4; Interoperability test methods and approaches; Part 1: Generic approach to interoperability testing". [5] ETSI ES 202 553: "Methods for Testing and Specification (MTS); TPLan: A notation for expressing Test Purposes". ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 9 [6] ETSI TS 134 229-1: "Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; Internet Protocol (IP) multimedia call control protocol based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol (SDP); Part 1: Protocol conformance specification (3GPP TS 34.229- 1 Release 8)". [7] ETSI TS 133 203: "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; 3G security; Access security for IP-based services (3GPP TS 33.203 Release 8)". [8] IETF RFC 2617: "HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access Authentication". [9] IETF RFC 3966: "The tel URI for Telephone Numbers". [10] ETSI TS 124 410: "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); TISPAN; NGN Signalling Control Protocol; Communication HOLD (HOLD) PSTN/ISDN simulation services; Protocol specification (3GPP TS 24.410 Release 8)". [11] ETSI TS 124 404: "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); TISPAN; PSTN/ISDN simulation services: Communication Diversion (CDIV); Protocol specification (3GPP TS 24.404 Release 7)". [12] ETSI TS 124 411: "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); TISPAN; PSTN/ISDN simulation services: Anonymous Communication Rejection (ACR) and Communication Barring (CB); Protocol specification (3GPP TS 24.411 Release 7)". [13] ETSI TS 124 407: "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); TISPAN; PSTN/ISDN simulation services; Originating Identification Presentation (OIP) and Originating Identification Restriction (OIR); Protocol specification (3GPP TS 24.407 Release 7)". [14] ETSI TS 183 063: "Telecommunications and Internet converged Services and Protocols for Advanced Networking (TISPAN); IMS-based IPTV stage 3 specification". [15] ETSI TS 124 247: "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; Messaging service using the IP Multimedia (IM) Core Network (CN) subsystem; Stage 3 (3GPP TS 24.247 Release 9)". [16] ETSI TS 129 165: "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; Inter-IMS Network to Network Interface (NNI) (3GPP TS 29.165 version 9.5.0 Release 9)". [17] ETSI TS 102 901: "IMS Network Testing (INT); IMS NNI Interoperability Test Specifications; IMS NNI interoperability test descriptions for RCS". [18] ETSI TS 129 163 (V9.4.0): "Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; Interworking between the IP Multimedia (IM) Core Network (CN) subsystem and Circuit Switched (CS) networks (3GPP TS 29.163 version 9.4.0 Release 9)". |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 2.2 Informative references | The following referenced documents are not necessary for the application of the present document but they assist the user with regard to a particular subject area. [i.1] ETSI TR 133 978: "Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); Security aspects of early IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) (3GPP TR 33.978 version 7.0.0 Release 7)". [i.2] ETSI TR 123 981: "Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; Interworking aspects and migration scenarios for IPv4-based IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) implementations (3GPP TR 23.981 Release 8)". ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 10 [i.3] ETSI TR 184 008: "Telecommunications and Internet converged Services and Protocols for Advanced Networking (TISPAN); Infrastructure ENUM Options for a TISPAN IPX". [i.4] IETF RFC 3761: "The E.164 to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI); Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Application (ENUM)". [i.5] GSMA PRD IR.67: "DNS/ENUM Guidelines for Service Providers & GRX/IPX Providers" ver.5.1. [i.6] IETF RFC 3403: "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS), Part Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) Database". |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 3 Abbreviations | For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply: 3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project ACL Automatic Congestion Level ACM Address Complete Message ACR Anonymous Communication Rejection ACR-CB Anonymous Communication Rejection – Communication Barring AKA Authentication and Key Agreement ALG Application Level Gateway ANM Answer Message AS (IMS) Application Server BC Broadcast CB Call Barring CDIV Call DIVersion CF (Test) ConFiguration CFU Call Forward Unconditional CFW Call FloW CN Core Network CoD Content on Demand CPG Call Progress Message CS Circuit Switched CSCF Call Session Control Function DB Enum database DHCP Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol DNS Domain Name System ENUM E.164 Number Mapping GSM Global System for Mobile Communications GSMA GSM Association HOLD Communication HOLD HSS Home Subscriber Server IAM Initial Address Message IAM_A Not applicable IBCF Interconnection Border Control Gateway I-CSCF Interrogating CSCF IFC Initial Filter Criteria II-NNI Not applicable IM IP Multimedia IMS IP Multimedia Subsystem IOI Inter Operator Identifier IP Internet Protocol IPsec Internet Protocol security IPTV IP Television IR Not applicable, document reference ISC IMS Service Control ISDN Integrated Service Digital Network ISUP ISDN User Part IUT Implementation Under Test ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 11 MF Media Function MGCF Media Gateway Control Function MGF Media Gateway Function MRFC Multimedia Resource Function Controller MRFP Multimedia Resource Function Processor MSRP Message Session Relay Protocol MTP Message Transfer Part NAPTR Naming Authority Pointer NNI Network-to-Network Interface N-PVR Network based Personal Video Recording NS Name Server OCB Outgoing Communication Barring OIP Originating Identification Presentation OIR Originating Identification Restriction PCM Pulse Code Modulation PCO Point of Control and Observation PCRF Policy and Charging Rules Function P-CSCF Proxy CSCF PO Point of Observation PoI Point of Interconnection PRACK Reliability of Provisional Responses PRD Not applicable, document reference PSTN Public Switched Telephone Network PVR Personal video recorder services RLC Release Complete Message RTSP Real Time Streaming Protocol SA Security Association SCF Session Control Function S-CSCF Serving CSCF SCTP Stream Control Transmission Protocol SDF Service Discovery Function SDP Session Description Protocol SGF Signalling Gateway Function SIP Session Initiation Protocol SS Simulation Services SUT System Under Test TCP Transmission Control Protocol TD Test Description TISPAN Telecommunications and Internet converged Services and Protocols for Advanced Networking TN Telephone Number TP Test Purpose TPLan Test Purpose Notation TSS Test Suite Structure TTL Time to live UC Use Case UC_2_I Not applicable UDP User Datagram Protocol UE User Equipment URI Uniform Record Identifier VoIP Voice over Internet Protocol XML eXtensible Markup Language |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4 IMS NNI Interoperability Test Specification | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.1 Introduction | The IMS NNI Interoperability Test Descriptions (TDs) defined in the following clauses are derived from the Test Purposes (TPs) specified in TS 186 011-1 [2]. The TDs cover both basic call procedures such as call establishment and call release and a selection of the most common supplementary services. ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 12 |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2 Test Prerequisites | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.1 IP Version | These test specifications are based on the use of IPv4 for SIP message transport throughout all IMS nodes as specified in TR 123 981 [i.2] but do not exclude the use of IPv6 in the case that all involved IMS nodes support this version of the IP protocol. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.2 Authentication and Security | The current test specification supports as default full IMS TS 133 203 [7] 3GPP security. Non-compliance with full IMS security features defined in TS 133 203 [7] is expected to be a problem mainly at the UE side, because of the potential lack of support of the USIM/ISIM interface (especially in 2G-only devices) and of the potential inability to support IPsec on some UE platforms. For those reasons, fallback to early IMS TR 133 978 [i.1] and SIP Digest authentication without key agreement and null authentication may be used to achieve satisfactory test results. Tests should however be executed with full IMS security if all required IMS nodes support it. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.3 Registration and Subscription | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.3.1 SIP Call Flow | This clause describes the registration call flow under the authentication and security scope described in clause 4.2.2. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.3.1.1 Early IMS Registration and Subscription Call Flow | Early IMS security does not allow SIP requests to be protected using an IPsec Security Association (SA) because it does not perform a key agreement procedure. IPsec security associations are not set up between UE and P-CSCF, as they are in the full IMS security solution. For early IMS security, the expected registration and subscription sequence is: Step Direction Message Comment UE IMS 1 The UE establishes an IP bearer as required by its specific access network (optional). 2 P-CSCF address discovery using DHCP procedures for IPv4 (optional). 3 REGISTER The UE sends initial registration for IMS services. Unprotected 4 200 OK The IMS responds with 200 OK. 5 SUBSCRIBE The UE subscribes to its registration event package. 6 200 OK or 202 Accepted The IMS responds with 200 OK or 202 Accepted. 7 NOTIFY The IMS sends initial NOTIFY for registration event package, containing full registration state information for the registered public user identity in the XML body. 8 200 OK The UE responds with 200 OK. ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 13 |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.3.1.2 Full IMS Registration and Subscription Call Flow | For full IMS security, the expected registration and subscription sequence is: Step Direction Message Comment UE IMS 1 The UE establishes an IP bearer as required by its specific access network (optional). 2 P-CSCF address discovery using DHCP procedures for IPv4 (optional). 3 REGISTER The UE sends initial registration for IMS services. Unprotected 4 401 Unauthorized The IMS responds with a valid Digest AKA authentication challenge and a list of integrity and encryption algorithms supported by the network as defined in the IMS_AKA procedure of TS 133 203 [7]. 5 Upon receipt of 401 Unauthorized, the UE selects the first integrity and encryption algorithm combination on the list received from the P-CSCF in 401 Unauthorized which is also supported by the UE. If the P-CSCF did not include any confidentiality algorithm in 401 Unauthorized then the UE shall select the NULL encryption algorithm. The UE then proceeds to establish two new pairs of IPSEC Security Associations (SA1 and SA2). 6 REGISTER The UE sends another REGISTER with authentication credentials over IPSEC security association SA1. Protected by SA1 7 200 OK The IMS responds with 200 OK over the same IPSEC security association SA1. 8 SUBSCRIBE The UE subscribes to its registration event package over the IPSEC security association SA2. Protected by SA2 9 200 OK or 202 Accepted The IMS responds with 200 OK or 202 Accepted over the IPSEC security association SA2. 10 NOTIFY The IMS sends initial NOTIFY for registration event package, containing full registration state information for the registered public user identity in the XML body, over the IPSEC security association SA2. 11 200 OK The UE responds with 200 OK over the IPSEC security association SA2. ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 14 |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.3.1.3 SIP Digest Registration and Subscription Call Flow | For SIP Digest authentication without key agreement and null authentication, the expected registration and subscription sequence is: Step Direction Message Comment UE IMS 1 The UE establishes an IP bearer as required by its specific access network (optional). 2 P-CSCF address discovery using DHCP procedures for IPv4 (optional). 3 REGISTER The UE sends initial registration for IMS services. Unprotected 4 401 Unauthorized The IMS responds with a valid HTTP Digest authentication challenge as defined in RFC 2617 [8]. 5 REGISTER The UE sends another REGISTER with authentication credentials. 6 200 OK The IMS responds with 200 OK. 7 SUBSCRIBE The UE subscribes to its registration event package. 8 200 OK or 202 Accepted The IMS responds with 200 OK or 202 Accepted. 9 NOTIFY The IMS sends initial NOTIFY for registration event package, containing full registration state information for the registered public user identity in the XML body. 10 200 OK The UE responds with 200 OK. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.4 Supported Options | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.4.1 Security | Support for security agreement is optional in case of Full IMS Reg. It shall only be used in case all IMS nodes support it. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.4.2 Signalling Compression | "No SigComp" is the default signalling configuration in all test descriptions. Tests may be executed with signalling compression if the required nodes support it. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.2.5 Number Resolution | "ENUM (RFC 3761 [i.4]) is a capability that transforms E.164 numbers into domain names and then uses the DNS (Domain Name System) to discover NAPTR records that specify the services available for a specific domain name." (TR 184 008 [i.3]). The test infrastructure focuses on the use of Infrastructure ENUM to map a telephone number into a SIP URI that could identify a specific point of interconnection (PoI) to that communication provider's network that could enable the originating party to establish communication with the associated terminating party either directly or through an IPX. The Infrastructure ENUM platform has a tiered structure and provides authoritative, service specific information to the quering party. A combination of Tier 0, Tier 1 and Tier 2 registries enables global discovery of ENUM data. When returning the SIP URI of an PoI the ENUM solution acts a hosted T2 ENUM registry for the number range holder. When returning a NS record the ENUM solution acts as either a Tier 0 or Tier 1 registry. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3 Test Infrastructure | In these clauses we define the involvement of the various IMS nodes specifically as they pertain to NNI testing. The configuration of the nodes is described. Points of control and observation are identified and static test configurations are described. The Mw interface or the Ic interface if topology hiding is required is the interface under observation for NNI interoperability testing. ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 15 |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1 Core IMS Nodes | The current testing scope includes IMS roaming and border control functionality. For IMS roaming, Mw reference point between IMS core in visited network (P-CSCF) and IMS core in home network will be monitored for testing purposes. For border control functionality, Mx reference point between IMS Core and IBCF, Ici reference point between an IBCF and another IBCF or I-CSCF belonging to a different IM CN subsystem network and Izi reference point between a TrGW and another TrGW or media handling node belonging to a different IM CN subsystem network will be monitored for testing purposes. For all test cases not requiring IMS roaming or border control functionality, P-CSCF, S-CSCF, I-CSCF, IBCF, and HSS are considered to be within a "black box" for testing purposes, i.e. the System Under Test (SUT). Interfaces within the IMS (excluding Mx reference point between IMS Core and IBCF when border control functionality is required) are considered internal and not observable for testing purposes. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.1 P-CSCF | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.1.1 Relevant Interfaces | The P-CSCF constitutes the point of entry for UE signalling into the IMS core. The Gm interface between the P-CSCF and the UE is used as a point of control and observation (PCO) for NNI interoperability testing purposes. In the case of IMS roaming configurations the Mw reference point of the P-CSCF is exposed at the NNI and used there as a point of observation (PO). |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.1.2 Node Configuration | The P-CSCF should be configured to support the pre-requisites outlined in clause 4.2. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.2 S-CSCF | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.2.1 Relevant Interfaces | The S-CSCF is the core IMS node delivering IMS services to subscribers. When no border control functionalities are applied, the Mw reference point between the S-CSCF and either I- or S-CSCF in another network domain is used as a PO against which NNI interoperability tests are validated. The Mw interfaces between I- and S-CSCFs within the same network are considered to be internal IMS interfaces. Although considered as internal and not explicitly involved in all NNI test configurations, it is recommended that these interface are exposed for troubleshooting purposes. When border control functionalities are applied, the Mx reference point between S-CSCF and IBCF within the same network domain, is used as a PO for NNI interoperability checks. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.2.2 Node Configuration | The S-CSCF should be configured to support the pre-requisites outlined in clause 4.2. When applicable based on the specific configuration, the S-CSCF must be provisioned to support required Application Servers (AS) as trusted nodes. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.3 I-CSCF | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.3.1 Relevant Interfaces | The I-CSCF is the contact point within an operator's network for all connections destined to a user of that network operator, or a roaming user currently located within that network operator's service area. When no border control functionalities are applied, the Mw reference point between the I-CSCF and an S-CSCF in another network domain is used as a PO against which NNI interoperability tests are validated. The Mw interfaces between I- and S-CSCFs within the same network are considered to be internal IMS interfaces. Although considered as internal and not explicitly involved in all NNI test configurations, it is recommended that these interface are exposed for troubleshooting purposes. When border control functionalities are applied, the Mx reference point between I-CSCF and IBCF within the same network domain, is used as a PO for NNI interoperability checks. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.3.2 Node Configuration | The I-CSCF should be configured to support the pre-requisites outlined in clause 4.2. ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 16 |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.4 IBCF | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.4.1 Relevant Interfaces | The IBCF is the core IMS node providing border control functionalities such as topology hiding, transport plane control, screening of SIP signalling or application level gateway (for instance enabling communication between IPv6 and IPv4 SIP applications). However, the IBCF can act also as a pass-through entity between adjacent IMS networks. The IcI reference point between the IBCF and either IBCF or I- or S-CSCF in another network domain is used as a PO against which NNI interoperability tests are validated. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.4.2 Node Configuration | The IBCF should be configured to support the pre-requisites outlined in clause 4.2. The IBCF node will be present in all tests to be executed. In case the requirement to support topology hiding is not explicitly stated in the pre-conditions of a test description it shall be assumed that the IBCF does not apply this functionality. In case the requirement to support application level gateway (ALG) is not explicitly stated in the pre-conditions of a test description it shall be assumed that the IBCF does not apply this functionality. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.5 HSS | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.5.1 Relevant Interfaces | The HSS constitutes the repository for IMS subscriber information. The Cx interface between the HSS and the S-CSCF and/or I-CSCF is considered an internal IMS interface. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.5.2 Node Configuration | The HSS should be configured within each IMS participating in an interoperability test, i.e. IMS_A as well as IMS_B, to interact with CSCFs as required using DIAMETER Cx interfaces. Users should be provisioned to match the sample profiles listed in table 1. In addition, each IMS shall have its own unique domain. Also the phone numbers configured in the two IMSes participating in an interoperability test shall be unique, i.e. IMS_A and IMS_B shall have no phone numbers in common. All public identities belong to the same implicitly registered set. Table 1: HSS sample user profiles Private Identity Public Identity 1 (SIP URI) Public Identity 2 (Tel URI) Default Public Identity Filter criteria userGEN_priv userGEN na 1 na userSIP_priv userSIP e.g. tel:+330123402 1 na userTEL_priv userTEL e.g. tel:+330123403 2 na userNOAS_priv userNOAS na 1 contact AS on terminating INVITE SESSION_TERMINATED userHOLD_priv userHOLD na 1 contact HOLD AS userOIP_priv userOIP na 1 contact OIP AS userOIR_priv userOIR na 1 contact OIR AS userACR_priv userACR na 1 contact ACR AS userCFU_priv userCFU na 1 contact CFU AS userIPTV_priv userIPTV na 1 Contact IPTV AS Public user identity may take the form of SIP or TEL URIs (RFC 3966 [9]). EXAMPLE 1: sip: userGEN@ims_a.net. EXAMPLE 2: tel: +330123402. A private user identity may also take the form of- <imsi>@ims.<xxx>mnc.<yyy>.mcc.3gppnetwork.org. EXAMPLE 3: 293410100367663@ims.041mnc.293.mcc.3gppnetwork.org. ETSI ETSI TS 186 011-2 V4.1.3 (2012-05) 17 |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.6 MRFC | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.6.1 Relevant Interfaces | The Media Resource Function Controller (MRFC) is a signalling plane node that acts as a SIP User Agent to the S-CSCF, and which controls the MRFP across an H.248 interface. The Mr interface between the MRFC and the S-CSCF, the Cr/Sr interfaces to the AS and the Mp interface to the MRFP are considered internal IMS interfaces. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.6.2 Node Configuration | The MRFC should be configured to support the pre-requisites outlined in clause 4.2. The need to activate the MRFC as part of an IMS core network depends highly on the test description to be executed. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.7 MRFP | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.7.1 Relevant Interfaces | The Media Resource Function Processor (MRFP) is a media plane node that implements all media-related functions. The Mp interface between the MRFP and the MRFC is considered an internal IMS interface. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.7.2 Node Configuration | The MRFP should be configured to support the pre-requisites outlined in clause 4.2. The need to activate the MRFP as part of an IMS core network depends highly on the test description to be executed. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.8 MGCF | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.8.1 Relevant Interfaces | The Media Gateway Controller Function (MGCF) does call control protocol conversion between SIP and ISUP. It also controls the resources in a Media Gateway across an H.248 interface. The Mg reference point between the MGCF and an I-CSCF in the same network domain is used as a PO against which NNI interoperability tests are validated. The E1 reference point to the CS network is used to verify the codings of the ISUP messages. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.8.2 Node Configuration | The MGCF should be configured to support the pre-requisites outlined in clause 4.2. The need to activate the MGCF as part of an IMS core network depends highly on the test description to be executed. |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.9 MGF | |
1b570a6648bd6e802a749e39655a3b23 | 186 011-2 | 4.3.1.9.1 Relevant Interfaces | The Media Gateway Function (MGF) interfaces with the media plane of the CS network, by converting between RTP and PCM. It can also transcode when the codecs do not match. The reference points of the MGF with other entities are out of the scope of the test descriptions in the present document. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.