METR Discrepancy Handling System --> Other METR Discrepancy Handling Systems:
discrepancy report details
This triple is bi-directional. See also
Other METR Discrepancy Handling Systems --> METR Discrepancy Handling System: discrepancy report details
Definitions
discrepancy report details (Information Flow): While investigating a consolidated discrepancy report, a translator agent might wish to see additional details (e.g., specifics about the time of each report, images included in the report). If so, they can make a request and obtain the discrepancy report details flow. Additionally, discrepancy report details can be transferred between METR Discrepancy Handling Centers.
METR Discrepancy Handling System (Source Physical Object): The 'METR Discrepancy Handling System' receives reports of discrepancies in rules from METR User Systems. It will perform a numerical analysis of discrepancy count vs. time for any given rule, and when warranted, report to the METR Regulation Center those rules with sufficient discrepancy reports to justify further investigation. It is identified as a separate center to provide a level of anonymity for the user that reports the issue. The METR Discrepancy Handling Center may register its availability as a service, and its associated cyber location information, with the Object Registration and Discovery System (ORDS).
Other METR Discrepancy Handling Systems (Destination Physical Object): Depending on deployments scenarios, a discrepancy report might be passed among multiple levels of Discrepancy Handling Systems. For example, a vehicle might be configured to report all its detected discrepancies to an OEM-operated Discrepancy Handling Center. This allows the OEM to become aware of potential problems with its discrepancy detection logic.
Once established thresholds are met, the OEM-operated Discrepancy Handling System might notify a Discrepancy Handling Center operated by a jurisdictional entity. The jurisdictional Discrepancy Handling System can then determine when the METR Regulation System is notified of the reported discrepancies.
Included In
This Triple is in the following Service Packages:
- None
This triple is associated with the following Functional Objects:
- None
This Triple is described by the following Functional View Data Flows:
- None
This Triple has the following triple relationships:
None |
Communication Solutions
- METR: Discrepancy Reporting Requirements - Secure Internet (ITS) (27)
- METR: Discrepancy Reporting Requirements - Apache Kafka (28)
- METR: Discrepancy Reporting Requirements - OMG DDS (28)
- METR: Discrepancy Reporting Requirements - OASIS MQTT (34)
- (None-Data) - Secure Internet (ITS) (43)
- METR: Discrepancy Reporting Requirements - OASIS AMQP (45)
Selected Solution
Solution Description
ITS Application Entity
ISO 24315-7 ISO 24315-8 |
Click gap icons for more info.
|
||
Mgmt
OMG DDS |
Facilities
(None) OMG DDS OMG DDS-RPC OMG DDSI-RTPS |
Security
OMG DDS-Security |
|
TransNet
|
|||
Access
Internet Subnet Alternatives |
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 | Discrepancy-handling flows may contain a significant amount of discrepancy reporting information, which could imply behavior in the field, actions of rules-agents and other activities that could be leveraged by bad actors. | Information contained in this flow will be used to assess the accuracy of existing rules; this will require some process that strips out incorrect reports, but the number of incorrect reports should be minimized to reduce undue processing. | Backoffice discrepancy handling flows should be basically reliable, else the discrepancy handling system will have difficulty functioning, which in turn could lead to negative safety or other impacts in the field. |
Security Characteristics | Value |
---|---|
Authenticable | True |
Encrypt | True |