Generic Communication Protocols Evaluation Project

What is this?  → Please refer to the projects overview page for a quick introduction, then for more details, the Kickoff slides, and recording.

Next call

 Generic Communication Protocols Evaluation

Next call:  Tuesday 10 September 2019  - 11:15am CET

Agenda

• presentation of the new FARA tool release
• SomeIP on Android: follow up of call with AA SIG
• AOB

Zoom Meeting

• Register in advance for this meeting:  Registration link (to be updated)
• Meeting link:  https://zoom.us/j/741931761
• Zoom Meeting Number:  741 931 761

Meeting Minutes ← use link

Presentations Materials ← use link

Project pages (list)

• [GPRO] REST/HTTP
• AMM informal GPRO poll
• Android
• Bench-marking of different protocols & technologies
• CoAP
• CommonAPI overview
• Evaluation criteria for GPRO technologies
• Franca/ARA::COM Demo
• Franca+
• Franca-ARA Stage 2 Project
• GPRO Meeting Minutes
• GPRO - Presentations Materials
• GPRO Whitepaper
• List of relevant technologies
• Overview of a few communication protocols/technologies
• Poll - Your favorite protocols

Definitions

Generic Protocol (in this context):

“Network (*and d IPC) protocols acting primarily as a transparent data carrier, applicable to many different application domains, but including convenience features above that of a plain data stream (socket). For example: data encoding, segmenting, opaque target addressing, routing, peer authentication, delivery guarantee, data integrity and service-discovery.”

• In other words, we are concerned with OSI model levels 5-6 (approx.)
• To reduce scope – focused on segmented segmented, atomic, event/message event/message- based semantics more than “streaming data”
• *IPC needs to be in scope, because of shared parts (data encoding) similarity, and that network-transparency is often a design goal.

<Single "project" definition to be copied from GA slide deck and then edited.>

Project Goals

<to be copied from GA deck and then edited>

Use cases

Information about real-world functions (ideally from user perspective) to anchor the technical discussion.

FILL IN HERE!!!

Philippe C

NB: see the target architecture in the attached file

The vehicle position computed in the telematic box shall be provided to applications carried by the smartphone

• the vehicle position is either raw (i.e. coming from the GNSS sensor) or estimated (i.e. computed by a dead reckoning algorithm)

Transmission of data shall be seamless

• to avoid mismatch between data types
• to reduce diversity of specifications by using a common format

Requirements: 

Evaluation criteria for GPRO technologies

List of relevant technologies ← use link

Comparisons of different communication protocols/technologies

• Overview Page containing one-paragraph summaries of REST/JSON/XML/SOAP.
• When survey/knowledge sharing phase winds down, the Evaluation Criteria page should be extended, evntually leading to comparisons and possibly recommendation.
  
  

Feature Selection

• We looked at the possibility to use feature-modeling tools (example:  Feature IDE) to encode a database (model) of possible protocol features.  Normal use of such tools is rather to define how a system can be configured, including all constraints, and then to present a UI to do that configuration  (I.e. selecting features rather than comparing solutions), but it could be useful.  
• Feature Selection tooling is definitely useful for complex feature modeling, so it's worth knowing about it and documenting it.    See May 15, 2018 in the Minutes .