TPEG2 - BTP/GeoNetworking/G5
Description:
This solution is used within Australia and the E.U.. It combines standards associated with TPEG2 with those for V-X: BTP/GeoNetworking/G5. The TPEG2 standards include upper-layer standards required to support multi-modal information services.. The V-X: BTP/GeoNetworking/G5 standards include lower-layer standards that support broadcast, near constant, low latency vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications using the ETSI GeoNetworking Bundle over the 5.9GHz spectrum.Relevant Regions:
- Australia
- European Union
Comm Profile: V-X: BTP/GeoNetworking/G5
Comm Class: LAN - Local Area Network
Standards in Profile:
| Level | Standard |
|---|---|
| Access | Bundle: ETSI ITS-G5 |
| Mgmt | ETSI 302 890-1 Service Announcement |
| Security | Bundle: ETSI ITS-S Security Architecture |
| TransNet | Bundle: GeoNetworking BTP |
Data Profile: TPEG2
Standards in Profile:
| Level | Standard |
|---|---|
| Facilities | Not Needed |
| ITS Application Entity | ISO 21219-15 TPEG2 - Traffic Event |
| Mgmt | ISO 21219-6 TPEG2 - Message Mgmt |
| Security | ISO 21219-24 TPEG2 - Light Encryption |
Solution Issues Severity: 32
The severity issue score calculation only includes issues associated with standards that are included by default.
Solution Issues:
| Default | Severity | Name | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| True | Low | Protocol features partly not applicable in the given context | Performance / Applicability Gap | A feature of the protocol is not fully applicable in the given context, e.g. GeoNetworking multi-hop forwarding in 5.9 GHz channels. |
| True | Medium | Overlap of standards | Overlap | Multiple standards have been developed to address this information and it is unclear which standard should be used to address this specific information flow. |
| True | Medium | Secure data access not provided | Security Gap | The solution does not define rules on how the application entity authenticates requests to accept or provide data. |
| True | Medium | Security inadequate | Security Gap | The solution does not provide adequate communications security for the information triple, which potentially jeopardizes C-ITS operations. |
| True | Medium | Still under development | Standardization Gap | A draft of the standard has been developed by the working group, but it was still under development at the time this analysis was performed. |
| True | Medium | Uncertainty about trust revocation mechanism | Security Gap | The mechanisms used to prevent bad actors from sending authorized messages is unproven. |
| True | High | Data/comm profile pairing | Standardization Gap | There are ambiguities as to how to (or if one should) couple the upper-layer standards defined in this solution with the indicated lower-layer standards. |
| True | High | Draft not available (Critical) | Standardization Gap | The standards development organization has established a work item for the subject standard but a draft is not available for this critical feature to enable the interface. The draft may be missing due to the work item being new or simply a lack of activity on the work item. |
Solution to Triples
This solution is used on the following information flow triples: