Service Monitor System --> Center:
personnel device fault data

Definitions

personnel device fault data (Information Flow): Personnel device fault information that can be used to identify personnel devices that require initialization, reconfiguration, repair or replacement. This flow identifies the device, the nature of the fault, and associated error codes and diagnostic data.

Service Monitor System (Source Physical Object): The 'Service Monitor System' represents one or more center-based systems that provide monitoring, management and control services necessary to other applications and/or devices operating within the Connected Vehicle Environment. These support services enable other applications to provide transportation services.

Center (Destination Physical Object): This general physical object is used to model core capabilities that are common to any center.

Included In

This Triple is in the following Service Packages:

This triple is associated with the following Functional Objects:

This Triple is described by the following Functional View Data Flows:

This Triple has the following triple relationships:

RelationshipSourceDestinationFlow
Depends On Personnel Device Service Monitor System personnel device status

Communication Solutions

Solutions are sorted in ascending Gap Severity order. The Gap Severity is the parenthetical number at the end of the solution.

Selected Solution

(None-Data) - OMG DDS

Solution Description

This solution is used within Canada and the U.S.. It combines standards associated with (None-Data) with those for OMG DDS. The (None-Data) standards include an unspecified set of standards at the upper layers. The OMG DDS standards include lower-layer standards that support secure data sharing and command operations between remote devices.

ITS Application Entity
Mind the gapMind the gap

Development needed
Click gap icons for more info.
Mgmt

OMG DDS
Facilities
Mind the gapMind the gapMind the gap

Development needed
OMG DDS
OMG DDS-RPC
OMG DDSI-RTPS
Security

OMG DDS-Security
TransNet

IETF RFC 768
IP Alternatives
Access

Internet Subnet Alternatives
TransNet TransNet

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Access Access

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

ITS Application ITS Application

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Mgmt Mgmt

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Facility Facility

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Security Security

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Note that some layers might have alternatives, in which case all of the gap icons associated with every alternative may be shown on the diagram, but the solution severity calculations (and resulting ordering of solutions) includes only the issues associated with the default (i.e., best, least severe) alternative.

Characteristics

Characteristic Value
Time Context Recent
Spatial Context Regional
Acknowledgement True
Cardinality Unicast
Initiator Source
Authenticable True
Encrypt True


Interoperability Description
Regional Interoperability throughout the geopolitical region is highly desirable, but if implemented differently in different transportation management jurisdictions, significant benefits will still accrue in each jurisdiction. Regardless, this Information Flow Triple should be implemented consistently within a transportation jurisdiction (i.e., the scope of a regional architecture).

Security

Information Flow Security
  Confidentiality Integrity Availability
Rating Moderate Moderate Moderate
Basis Device status information should not be viewable by third parties, as those with criminal intent may use this information toward their own ends. If incorrect or changed, could lead to inappropriate maintenance activity, which has a significant cost in itself and contributes negatively to system operational status. Scope is small, but impact significant if this occurs with many instances. A delay in reporting this may cause a delay in necessary maintenance. Considered higher availability requirement than the source flow (RSE status) because this information aggregates many instances of the source.


Security Characteristics Value
Authenticable True
Encrypt True