SIST EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4:2005
(Main)Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Advice of Charge (AOC) supplementary service; Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Part 4: Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT) proforma specification for the user
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Advice of Charge (AOC) supplementary service; Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Part 4: Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT) proforma specification for the user
Update to references to cite latest basic call standards et al. Incorporation of minor technical modifications where necessary.
Digitalno omrežje z integriranimi storitvami (ISDN) - Dopolnilna storitev: obvestilo o ceni (AOC) - Protokol digitalne naročniške signalizacije št. 1 (DSS1) - 4. del: Abstraktni preskušalni niz (ATS) in dodatna informacija za preskušanje delne izvedbe protokola - Proforma specifikacija za uporabnika
General Information
Standards Content (Sample)
SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-julij-2005
'LJLWDOQRRPUHåMH]LQWHJULUDQLPLVWRULWYDPL ,6'1 'RSROQLOQDVWRULWHY REYHVWLOR
RFHQL $2& 3URWRNROGLJLWDOQHQDURþQLãNHVLJQDOL]DFLMHãW '66 GHO
$EVWUDNWQLSUHVNXãDOQLQL] $76 LQGRGDWQDLQIRUPDFLMD]DSUHVNXãDQMHGHOQH
L]YHGEHSURWRNROD3URIRUPDVSHFLILNDFLMD]DXSRUDEQLND
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Advice of Charge (AOC) supplementary
service; Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Part 4: Abstract
Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing
(PIXIT) proforma specification for the user
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: EN 300 182-4 Version 1.2.4
ICS:
33.080 Digitalno omrežje z Integrated Services Digital
integriranimi storitvami Network (ISDN)
(ISDN)
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.
EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
European Standard (Telecommunications series)
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN);
Advice of Charge (AOC) supplementary service;
Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol;
Part 4: Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol
Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT)
proforma specification for the user
2 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
Reference
REN/SPS-05145-K-4 (1op00iqo.PDF)
Keywords
ISDN, DSS1, supplementary service, AOC,
testing, ATS, PIXIT, user
ETSI
Postal address
F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE
Office address
650 Route des Lucioles - Sophia Antipolis
Valbonne - FRANCE
Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16
Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C
Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la
Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88
Internet
secretariat@etsi.fr
http://www.etsi.fr
http://www.etsi.org
Copyright Notification
No part may be reproduced except as authorized by written permission.
The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.
© European Telecommunications Standards Institute 1998.
All rights reserved.
ETSI
3 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
Contents
Intellectual Property Rights.5
Foreword .5
1 Scope.6
2 Normative references .6
3 Definitions and abbreviations .7
3.1 Definitions . 7
3.2 Abbreviations. 7
4 Abstract Test Method (ATM) .8
5 Untestable test purposes.8
6 ATS conventions.8
6.1 Declarations part. 8
6.1.1 Type definitions . 8
6.1.1.1 Simple type definitions . 8
6.1.1.2 Structured type definitions. 9
6.1.1.2.1 TTCN structured type definitions . 9
6.1.1.2.2 ASN.1 structured type definitions. 9
6.1.1.3 ASP type definitions. 10
6.1.1.3.1 TTCN ASP type definitions. 10
6.1.1.3.2 ASN.1 ASP type definitions. 11
6.1.1.4 PDU type definitions . 11
6.1.1.4.1 TTCN PDU type definitions . 11
6.1.1.4.2 ASN.1 PDU type definitions. 11
6.1.2 Test suite constants. 11
6.1.3 Test suite parameters. 11
6.1.4 Variables . 11
6.1.4.1 Test suite variables . 11
6.1.4.2 Test case variables. 11
6.1.5 Test suite operation definitions . 12
6.2 Constraints part. 12
6.2.1 Structured type constraint declaration . 12
6.2.2 ASN.1 type constraint declaration. 12
6.2.2.1 Specification of encoding rules. 13
6.2.3 ASP type constraint declaration . 14
6.2.3.1 ASN.1 ASP type constraint declaration. 14
6.2.3.2 TTCN ASP type constraint declaration . 14
6.2.4 PDU type constraint declaration. 14
6.2.4.1 ASN.1 PDU type constraint declaration . 14
6.2.4.2 TTCN PDU type constraint declaration. 14
6.2.5 Chaining of constraints. 14
6.2.5.1 Static chaining . 14
6.2.5.2 Dynamic chaining. 14
6.2.6 Derived constraints. 15
6.2.7 Parameterized constraints. 15
6.2.8 Value assignment . 15
6.2.8.1 Specific values. 15
6.2.8.2 Matching values. 15
6.3 Dynamic part. 15
6.3.1 Test cases . 15
6.3.2 Test steps. 15
6.3.3 Defaults . 16
ETSI
4 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
7 ATS to TP map .16
8 PCTR conformance.16
9 PIXIT conformance.16
10 ATS conformance .16
Annex A (normative): Protocol Conformance Test Report (PCTR) proforma.17
A.1 Identification summary .17
A.1.1 Protocol conformance test report. 17
A.1.2 IUT identification . 17
A.1.3 Testing environment . 17
A.1.4 Limits and reservations . 18
A.1.5 Comments . 18
A.2 IUT conformance status .18
A.3 Static conformance summary.18
A.4 Dynamic conformance summary.18
A.5 Static conformance review report .19
A.6 Test campaign report.19
A.7 Observations.22
Annex B (normative): Partial PIXIT proforma.23
B.1 Identification summary .23
B.2 Abstract test suite summary .23
B.3 Test laboratory .23
B.4 Client (of the test laboratory).24
B.5 System Under Test (SUT).24
B.6 Protocol information .25
B.6.1 Protocol identification. 25
B.6.2 Parameter values. 25
B.6.3 Sending of messages by IUT. 25
Annex C (normative): Abstract Test Suite (ATS).26
C.1 The TTCN Graphical form (TTCN.GR).26
C.2 The TTCN Machine Processable form (TTCN.MP) .26
Annex D (informative): General structure of ATS .27
Annex E (informative): Changes with respect to the previous ETS 300 182-4 .28
History.29
ETSI
5 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
Intellectual Property Rights
IPRs essential or potentially essential to the present document may have been declared to ETSI. The information
pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found
in SR 000 314: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in respect
of ETSI standards", which is available free of charge from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the
ETSI Web server (http://www.etsi.fr/ipr or http://www.etsi.org/ipr).
Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Policy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee
can be given as to the existence of other IPRs not referenced in SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web server)
which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document.
Foreword
This European Standard (Telecommunications series) has been produced by ETSI Technical Committee Signalling
Protocols and Switching (SPS).
The present document is part 4 of a multi-part standard covering the Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one
(DSS1) protocol specification for the Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) Advice of Charge (AOC)
supplementary service, as described below:
Part 1: "Protocol specification";
Part 2: "Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement (PICS) proforma specification";
Part 3: "Test Suite Structure and Test Purposes (TSS&TP) specification for the user";
Part 4: "Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing
(PIXIT) proforma specification for the user";
Part 5: "Test Suite Structure and Test Purposes (TSS&TP) specification for the network";
Part 6: "Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT)
proforma specification for the network".
The present version updates the references to the basic call specifications.
National transposition dates
Date of adoption of this EN: 19 June 1998
Date of latest announcement of this EN (doa): 30 September 1998
Date of latest publication of new National Standard
or endorsement of this EN (dop/e): 31 March 1999
Date of withdrawal of any conflicting National Standard (dow): 31 March 1999
ETSI
6 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
1 Scope
This fourth part of EN 300 182 specifies the Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra
Information for Testing (PIXIT) proforma for the User side of the T reference point or coincident S and T reference
point (as defined in ITU-T Recommendation I.411 [11]) of implementations conforming to the stage three standard for
the Advice of Charge (AOC) supplementary service for the pan-European Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN)
by means of the Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol, EN 300 182-1 [2].
EN 300 182-3 [4] specifies the Test Suite Structure and Test Purposes (TSS&TP) related to this ATS and partial PIXIT
proforma specification. Other parts specify the TSS&TP and the ATS and partial PIXIT proforma for the Network side
of the T reference point or coincident S and T reference point of implementations conforming to EN 300 182-1 [2].
2 Normative references
References may be made to:
a) specific versions of publications (identified by date of publication, edition number, version number, etc.), in
which case, subsequent revisions to the referenced document do not apply; or
b) all versions up to and including the identified version (identified by "up to and including" before the version
identity); or
c) all versions subsequent to and including the identified version (identified by "onwards" following the version
identity); or
d) publications without mention of a specific version, in which case the latest version applies.
A non-specific reference to an ETS shall also be taken to refer to later versions published as an EN with the same
number.
[1] EN 300 403-1: "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Digital Subscriber Signalling System
No. one (DSS1) protocol; Signalling network layer for circuit-mode basic call control; Part 1:
Protocol specification [ITU-T Recommendation Q.931 (1993), modified]".
[2] EN 300 182-1 (V1.2): "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Advice of Charge (AOC)
supplementary service; Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Part 1:
Protocol specification".
[3] EN 300 182-2 (V1.2): "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Advice of Charge (AOC)
supplementary service; Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Part 2:
Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement (PICS) proforma specification".
[4] EN 300 182-3 (V1.2): "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Advice of Charge (AOC)
supplementary service; Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Part 3: Test
Suite Structure and Test Purposes (TSS&TP) specification for the user".
[5] EN 300 196-1: "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Generic functional protocol for the
support of supplementary services; Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol;
Part 1: Protocol specification".
[6] ISO/IEC 9646-1: "Information Technology - OSI Conformance Testing Methodology and
Framework; Part 1: General Concepts".
[7] ISO/IEC 9646-2: "Information Technology - OSI Conformance Testing Methodology and
Framework; Part 2: Abstract Test Suite Specification".
[8] ISO/IEC 9646-3: "Information Technology - OSI Conformance Testing Methodology and
Framework; Part 3: The Tree and Tabular Combined Notation".
[9] ISO/IEC 9646-4: "Information Technology - OSI Conformance Testing Methodology and
Framework; Part 4: Test realization".
ETSI
7 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
[10] ISO/IEC 9646-5: "Information Technology - OSI Conformance Testing Methodology and
Framework; Part 5: Requirements on test laboratories and clients for the conformance assessment
process".
[11] ITU-T Recommendation I.411 (1993): "ISDN user-network interfaces - Reference configurations".
[12] CCITT Recommendation X.209 (1988): "Specification of Basic Encoding Rules for Abstract
Syntax Notation One (ASN.1)".
3 Definitions and abbreviations
3.1 Definitions
For the purposes of the present document, the following definitions apply:
Abstract Test Suite (ATS): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
Implementation Under Test (IUT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
Lower Tester (LT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
Point of Control and Observation (PCO): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement (PICS): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
PICS proforma: See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
PIXIT proforma: See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
System Under Test (SUT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
Upper Tester (UT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [6].
3.2 Abbreviations
For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply:
AOC Advice of Charge
ASP Abstract Service Primitive
ATM Abstract Test Method
ATS Abstract Test Suite
BER Basic Encoding Rules
ExTS Executable Test Suite
FIE Facility Information Element
IUT Implementation Under Test
LT Lower Tester
MOT Means Of Testing
PCO Point of Control and Observation
PDU Protocol Data Unit
PICS Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement
PIXIT Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing
SUT System Under Test
TCP Test Co-ordination Procedures
TP Test Purpose
TTCN Tree and Tabular Combined Notation
UT Upper Tester
ETSI
8 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
4 Abstract Test Method (ATM)
The remote test method is applied for the AOC user ATS. The Point of Control and Observation (PCO) resides at the
service access point between layers 2 and 3. This PCO is named "L" (for Lower). The L PCO is used to control and
observe the behaviour of the Implementation Under Test (IUT) and test case verdicts are assigned depending on the
behaviour observed at this PCO.
Tester SUT
LT IUT
PCO
Layer 2 Layer 2
Layer 1 Layer 1
Service provider
Figure 1: Remote test method
ISO/IEC 9646-2 [7] allows the informal expression of Test Co-ordination Procedures (TCP) between the System Under
Test (SUT) upper layer(s) and the Lower Tester (LT). In the ATS contained in annex C, TCP is achieved by use of a
second "informal" PCO, called "O" (for Operator). This PCO is used to specify control but not observation above the
IUT and consequently, events at this PCO are never used to generate test case verdicts. The use of this O PCO is
regarded as a preferred alternative to the use of the implicit send event, in that it allows the ATS to specify in a clear and
meaningful way what actions are required to be performed on the IUT.
5 Untestable test purposes
There are no untestable test purposes associated with this ATS.
6 ATS conventions
This clause is structured similarly to the structure of a TTCN ATS. However, the names of the subclauses are arranged
in a way more suitable to the present document.
6.1 Declarations part
6.1.1 Type definitions
6.1.1.1 Simple type definitions
Where appropriate, simple types have a length, a value list or a range restriction attached.
Simple types defined as being of some string type (e.g. BIT STRING, OCTET STRING), have a length restriction or a
value list attached.
Simple types, defined as being of INTEGER type, have a value list or a range restriction attached.
ETSI
9 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
6.1.1.2 Structured type definitions
6.1.1.2.1 TTCN structured type definitions
All structured type definitions are provided with a full name.
All elements in every structured type definition, defined as being of some string type (e.g. BIT STRING,
OCTET STRING), have a length restriction attached.
If an element in a structured type definition is defined as being of a referenced type, the (possible) restriction is defined
in that referenced type.
For information elements the identifier, which is unique for each element, has its type defined as a simple type where the
value list is restricted to the single value which is the identifier itself. This has the advantage that it allows a test system
derived from this ATS to easily identify information elements embedded in messages. An ATS where information
element identifiers are represented as unrestricted types can present difficulties for a derived test system in the case
where it needs to find one information element embedded in a number of others and the constraints for the other
elements have the any-or-omit value. In such a case the test system cannot easily find the beginning of each information
element.
6.1.1.2.2 ASN.1 structured type definitions
ASN.1 has been used for three major reasons. First, types defined in ASN.1 can model problems that "pure" TTCN
cannot. For instance, data structures modelling ordered or unordered sequences of data are preferably defined in ASN.1.
Second, ASN.1 provides a better restriction mechanism for type definitions by using sub-type definitions. Third, it is
necessary to use ASN.1 to reproduce the type definitions for remote operation components as specified in the base
standards.
The fact that ASN.1 provides a better restriction mechanism for type definitions is used for the purpose of achieving
type-compatibility.
In table 1, the ASN.1 type BIT7OR15 is defined as being of type BIT STRING with a size constraint attached to it. The
size is determined by the value of CR_LENGTH, a test suite parameter. It can have the value of either 7 or 15. The type
BIT7OR15 is used in the structured type CR, field cr_r allowing this type to represent a Basic Access or a Primary Rate
Access call reference. By using this type definition the field cr_r is always type compatible with values of type
BIT STRING (SIZE(7)) and BIT STRING (SIZE(15)). Another approach to solve this problem would be to define the
type BIT7OR15 as BIT STRING (SIZE(7 | 15)). This type has a small disadvantage compared with the previous one. It
is impossible, in run-time, to determine the actual length of any instance of this type.
Table 1: ASN.1 type definition BIT7OR15
ASN.1 Type Definition
Type Name : BIT7OR15
Comments :
Type Definition
BIT STRING(SIZE(CR_LENGTH))
Table 2 shows a typical use of ASN.1. The CHI element will have two different type definitions depending on whether it
represents basic or primary rate access. In TTCN, this needs to be defined as two different types. In ASN.1 this can be
done in one, the type being a choice of either BASIC_CHI or PRIMARY_CHI. These two types are then (locally)
defined in the same table.
ETSI
10 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
Table 2: ASN.1 type definition CHI
ASN.1 Type Definition
Type Name : CHI
Comments : Info Element Channel Identification
EN 300 403-1 subclause 4.5.13
Type Definition
CHOICE {
basic BASIC_CHI,
primary PRIMARY_CHI
}
-- Local type definitions --
BASIC_CHI ::= SEQUENCE {
chi_i CHI_I, -- Identifier
chi_l BIT STRING(SIZE(8)), -- Length
chi_e3_cs BIT STRING(SIZE(8)) -- Channel selection
}
PRIMARY_CHI ::= SEQUENCE {
chi_i CHI_I, -- Identifier
chi_l BIT STRING(SIZE(8)), -- Length
chi_e3_p1 BIT STRING(SIZE(4)), -- First nibble of Channel selection
chi_e3_pe BIT STRING(SIZE(1)), -- Preferred/Exclusive Bit
chi_e3_p3 BIT STRING(SIZE(3)), -- Last three bits of Channel selection
chi_e4 BIT STRING(SIZE(8)), -- Channel type
chi_e5_chl BIT STRING(SIZE(1)),
chi_e5_ch2 BIT STRING(SIZE(7)) -- Channel number
}
Table 3 shows an example of how ASN.1 can be used to model unordered sequences.
Table 3: ASN.1 type definition FIES
ASN.1 Type Definition
Type Name : FIES
Comments :
Type Definition
SET OF FIE
The possibility to use TTCN and ASN.1 in combination is used, i.e. referring to an ASN.1 type from a TTCN type.
6.1.1.3 ASP type definitions
6.1.1.3.1 TTCN ASP type definitions
TTCN ASP type definitions only contain one PDU or no PDU at all. The relationship between an ASP type and a PDU
type is one-to-one. That is, there exists one ASP type definition for each PDU type definition (if that ASP type contains
a PDU).
All TTCN ASP type definitions are provided with a full identifier.
Some ASPs are not parameterized as shown in the example in table 4. Such ASPs are only used for requesting or
receiving service from the lower layer.
Table 4: TTCN ASP type definition DL_REL_IN
TTCN ASP Type Definition
ASP NAME : DL_REL_IN
(DL_RELEASE_INDICATION)
PCO Type : SAP
Comments :
Parameter Name | Parameter Type | Comments
Detailed Comments :
ETSI
11 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
Table 5 shows an example of a parameterized ASP. All ASPs containing PDUs contain only that PDU and no other
parameters.
Table 5: TTCN ASP type definition DL_DATA_RQ_ALERT
TTCN ASP Type Definition
ASP NAME : DL_DATA_RQ_ALERT
(DL_DATA_REQUEST)
PCO Type : SAP
Comments :
Parameter Name | Parameter Type | Comments
mun (MessageUnit) |ALERT_PDU |
Detailed Comments :
6.1.1.3.2 ASN.1 ASP type definitions
There are no ASN.1 ASP type definitions in the ATS.
6.1.1.4 PDU type definitions
6.1.1.4.1 TTCN PDU type definitions
The TTCN PDU type reflects the actual data being transferred or received. All PDUs are embedded in ASPs.
If a specific PDU type definition contains elements defined in terms of a pre-defined type, that element has a restriction
attached to it.
6.1.1.4.2 ASN.1 PDU type definitions
There are no ASN.1 PDU type definitions in the ATS.
6.1.2 Test suite constants
No test suite constants are used or defined in this ATS.
6.1.3 Test suite parameters
Each test suite parameter is defined in terms of a predefined type or a referenced type. A referenced type is used when it
is necessary to attach restrictions to these type definitions (it is not allowed to include restrictions directly in the test
suite parameter table). The referenced type can have a length or value restriction attached to it in its declaration table.
6.1.4 Variables
6.1.4.1 Test suite variables
No test suite variables are used or defined in this ATS.
6.1.4.2 Test case variables
Each test case variable is defined in terms of a predefined type or a referenced type. A referenced type is used when it is
necessary to attach restrictions to these type definitions (it is not allowed to include restrictions directly in the test case
variable table). The referenced type can have a length or value restriction attached to it in its declaration table.
Where test case variables are used in constraints, they are passed as formal parameters.
ETSI
12 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
6.1.5 Test suite operation definitions
The description part of a test suite operation definition uses either natural language or meta C.
Table 6: Test suite operation definition ASSIGN_CHI
Test Suite Operation Definition
Operation Name : ASSIGN_CHI(basic, primary : CHI; basic_flag : BOOLEAN)
Result Type : CHI
Comments : This operation is used to assign a correct Channel identification information
element to PDUs dependent on the type of access that is tested.
Description
{
if(basic_flag)
return basic;
else
return primary
}
Detailed comments :
The test suite operation definition shown in table 6 is used in the constraints part when assigning an element of type CHI
a value. As previously described, the CHI type can be defined in two ways depending on whether the ATS is testing
basic or primary rate access. To avoid duplicate types and thereby duplicate test cases the CHI type is defined in ASN.1.
This operation is used to assign a value to an element of CHI type. It takes three parameters:
SULPDU\DFRQVWUDLQWRIW\SH&+,YDOLGIRUSULPDU\UDWHDFFHVV
EDVLFDFRQVWUDLQWRIW\SH&+,YDOLGIRUEDVLFDFFHVV
EDVLFBIODJD%RROHDQYDOXH758(LIEDVLFDFFHVVLVDSSOLFDEOH)$/6(RWKHUZLVH
This operation returns the correct constraint according to the Boolean flag basic_flag. That constraint will then be
assigned to the specific element of type CHI.
6.2 Constraints part
6.2.1 Structured type constraint declaration
For every structured type definition there exists one or more structured type constraint.
6.2.2 ASN.1 type constraint declaration
Constraints of this type are used to assign the corresponding type a specific value. These constraints are used for the
purpose of modelling unordered data or specific types that cannot be expressed in TTCN.
A value assigned to an element of type SET OF differs depending on whether it is a send or receive constraint.
Table 7: ASN.1 type constraint declaration fIEs (send constraint)
ASN.1 Type Constraint Declaration
Constraint Name : fIEs(comp : Component)
ASN.1 Type : FIE
Derivation Path :
Comments : Send FIE which will contain one component "comp".
Description
{
informationElementIdentifier '00011100'B,
length CALC_FIE_LENGTH(comp),
extBit '1'B,
spareBits '00'B,
protocolProfile '10001'B,
components {comp}
}
Detailed comments :
NOTE 1: The last element in the constraint, components, is of type SET OF Component where Component is
structured data of some type.
ETSI
13 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
If the constraint is a send constraint (as in table 7) the value for the component element is stated as "{comp}" where
comp is an argument received as a parameter. The "{" and "}" turns the value into a SET OF value which is correct
according to that element's type definition.
Table 8: ASN.1 type constraint declaration fIEr (receive constraint)
ASN.1 Type Constraint Declaration
Constraint Name : fIEr(comp : Component)
ASN.1 Type : FIE
Derivation Path :
Comments : A received FIE which can contain several components, but which contains at
least "comp".
Description
{
informationElementIdentifier '00011100'B,
length '????????'B,
extBit '1'B,
spareBits '00'B,
protocolProfile '10001'B,
components SUPERSET({comp})
}
Detailed comments :
NOTE 2: The last element in the constraint, components, is of type SET OF Component where Component is
structured data of some type.
If the constraint is a receive constraint (as in table 8) the corresponding matching value is assigned by using
SUPERSET. The key-word SUPERSET has an argument that is type compatible with the type definition of that field. In
table 8, the element named components is defined as "SET OF Component" and this implies that the argument to
SUPERSET should be of type SET OF Component. This is achieved the same way as for send constraints, enclosing the
value in curly brackets.
The semantic of SUPERSET is stated in ISO/IEC 9646-3 [8], subclause 11.6.4.7. In short it defines the semantic as
follows: "A value that uses SUPERSET matches the incoming value if, and only if, the incoming value contains at least
all of the elements defined within the SUPERSET, and may contain more elements." This is exactly the semantic
definition used in this ATS.
6.2.2.1 Specification of encoding rules
At the time of specifying this ATS the mechanisms related to encoding of ASN.1 types, specified in DAM-2 of
ISO/IEC 9646-3 [8], were not yet stable. Nevertheless as there is a variation in the encoding rules as applied to ASN.1
types and constraints specified in this ATS, a mechanism is used to differentiate the different encoding rules. Given the
non-finalized status of DAM-2, a solution which is broadly in the spirit of DAM-2 has been created. Comment fields
have been used as a means of including the encoding rules.
For ASN.1 used in this ATS, two variations of encoding rules are used. One is the commonly known Basic Encoding
Rules (BER) as specified in CCITT Recommendation X.209 [12]. In the second case the encoding is according to
ISDN, i.e. the ASN.1 data types are a representation of structures contained within the ISDN specification (basic call,
Generic functional protocol or individual supplementary service). For example, if octets of an information element are
specified in ASN.1 as a SEQUENCE then this should be encoded in an Executable Test Suite (ExTS) as any other ISDN
information element specified using tabular TTCN. This ISDN encoding variation is the default encoding rule for this
ATS. This means that all ASN.1 constraint tables are encoded using ISDN (non-BER) encoding unless stated otherwise.
BER encoding should never be applied to an ASN.1 constraint where BER encoding has not been specified.
For BER encoding, an indication is given in the comments field of the table header. For this ATS such indications
appear in the ASN.1 type constraint declaration tables only. In the first line of the table header comment field, the
notation "ASN1_Encoding: BER" is used.
Note that within BER, there are a number of variations for the encoding of lengths of fields. According to
EN 300 196-1 [5], an IUT should be able to interpret all length forms within BER for received PDUs. When sending
PDUs containing BER encoding, EN 300 196-1 [5] gives guidelines but makes no restrictions on the length forms within
BER which an IUT may apply.
In relation to components sent by the tester to the IUT, implementors of this ATS shall use a variety of length forms
such that at least one of each of the length forms is sent to the IUT during a test campaign. The variations of length
forms to be used are indefinite, short definite and long definite.
ETSI
14 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
In this particular ATS all ASN.1 type constraints which are of type "Component" are to be encoded using BER.
Table 9: ASN.1 type constraint declaration showing use of encoding variation
ASN.1 Type Constraint Declaration
Constraint Name : Beg3PTYinv
ASN.1 Type : Component
Derivation Path :
Comments : ASN1_Encoding: BER
Receive component: Begin3PTY invoke component
Description
begin3PTY_Components
begin3PTY_InvokeComp
{ invokeID ? ,
operation_value localValue 4}
Detailed comments :
6.2.3 ASP type constraint declaration
6.2.3.1 ASN.1 ASP type constraint declaration
No ASN.1 ASP type constraint declaration exists in this ATS.
6.2.3.2 TTCN ASP type constraint declaration
For TTCN ASP constraint declarations there is a one-to-one relationship between its type and the constraint. That is,
there is only one constraint for each TTCN ASP Type Declaration. The reason for this is that the ASPs are used only for
carrying a specific PDU value. The many ASP constraints (and types) could have been avoided by using the meta type
PDU, but that was not suitable as values inside a specific PDU have to be referenced. To reference elements inside a
value of meta type PDU is not allowed according to ISO/IEC 9646-3 [8], so each ASP has to be defined as having a
parameter of a specific PDU type.
In all ASP constraints the embedded PDU constraint is either chained static or "semi-dynamic". That is, the PDU
constraint is always fixed to a specific ASP constraint but it (the PDU) may be parameterized.
All ASP constraints have a specific value for its parameter. No matching symbols are used in ASPs.
6.2.4 PDU type constraint declaration
6.2.4.1 ASN.1 PDU type constraint declaration
No ASN.1 PDU type constraint declaration exists in this ATS.
6.2.4.2 TTCN PDU type constraint declaration
PDU constraints are used for assigning values or patterns to the data being sent or received.
6.2.5 Chaining of constraints
6.2.5.1 Static chaining
Static chaining, that is a fixed reference to a specific constraint, is used in this ATS. The static chaining is used for static
binding of both variables and sub-structures.
6.2.5.2 Dynamic chaining
Dynamic chaining is achieved when having a reference to a value which is unknown. The only thing known (before run-
time) is the type of that reference. The reference is passed as a parameter. Strict dynamic chaining is not used in this
ATS. What is used is something that is called "semi-dynamic chaining". The definition of semi-dynamic chaining is that
the fixed reference is parameterized with an unknown value. That value is received as a parameter.
ETSI
15 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
Table 10: TTCN ASP constraint declaration A_RST1
TTCN ASP Constraint Declaration
Constraint Name : A_RST1(FLAG : INTEGER)
ASN.1 Type : DL_DAT_IN_RESTARTr
Derivation Path :
Comments :
Parameter Name Parameter Value Comments
mun RST1(FLAG) RST1(FLAG)
Detailed comments :
Table 10 is an example of semi-dynamic chaining. The TTCN ASP constraint is parameterized with an INTEGER value
named FLAG. That value is passed further down in the structure as a parameter to a static named PDU constraint
reference.
6.2.6 Derived constraints
No derivation of any constraint is used. All constraints are considered to be base constraints.
6.2.7 Parameterized constraints
Parameterized constraints are used in this ATS.
6.2.8 Value assignment
6.2.8.1 Specific values
For specific value assignment both explicit values and references to explicit values are used.
6.2.8.2 Matching values
As matching values the following mechanisms are used:
Instead of Value:
AnyOrOmit "*"
AnyValue "?"
Omit "-"
Inside value:
AnyOne "?"
AnyOrNone "*"
6.3 Dynamic part
6.3.1 Test cases
Each test case contains the test purpose text from EN 300 182-3 [4]. To be able to read and understand the test case
dynamic behaviour it is recommended that the test steps are understood first.
6.3.2 Test steps
Much use has been made of test steps to avoid needless repetition of dynamic behaviour. Many test steps are based on
those used for the ISDN basic call ATS.
ETSI
16 EN 300 182-4 V1.2.4 (1998-06)
6.3.3 Defaults
Note the use of the RETURN statement which is defined in DAM1 of ISO/IEC 9646-3 [8]. This allows valid
background behaviour to be handled in the default tree with a possibility to return to the original set of alternatives in the
test case.
7 ATS to TP map
The identifiers used for the TPs are reused as test case names. Thus there is a straightforward one-to-one mapping.
8 PCTR conformance
A test laboratory, when requested by a client to produce a PCTR, is required, as specified in ISO/IEC 9646-5 [10], to
produce a PCTR conformant with the PCTR template given in annex B of ISO/IEC 9646-5 [10].
Furthermore, a test laboratory, offering testing for the ATS specification contained in annex C, whe
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.
Loading comments...