Authorizing Center --> Other Authorizing Centers:
permission request coordination

This triple is bi-directional. See also Other Authorizing Centers --> Authorizing Center: permission request coordination

Definition
Included In
Communication Solutions
Characteristics
Security

Definitions

permission request coordination (Information Flow): Coordination of permission requests between jurisdictions or regions that allow permissions to be managed that may span more than one jurisdiction.

Authorizing Center (Source Physical Object): The 'Authorizing Center' provides the functionality needed to enable data exchange between and among mobile and fixed transportation users. Its primary mission is to enable safety, mobility and environmental communications-based applications for both mobile and non-mobile users. The Authorizing Center has some jurisdiction over limited access resources; typically this includes roadside application access and radio spectrum licensing. It may be implemented as an autonomous center or as a set of supporting services that are co-located within another center.

Other Authorizing Centers (Destination Physical Object): 'Other Authorizing Centers' provides a source and destination for information flows between multiple authorizing centers that manage permissions for the Connected Vehicle Environment. The interface represented by this object enables coordination of permissions between centers in different regions, jurisdictions, or application areas.

Included In

This Triple is in the following Service Packages:

SU02: Core Authorization

This triple is associated with the following Functional Objects:

Core Authorization

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

This Triple has the following triple relationships:

Relationship	Source	Destination	Flow
Interactive	Other Authorizing Centers	Authorizing Center	permission request coordination

Communication Solutions

(None-Data) - Secure Internet (ITS) (43)

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) - Secure Internet (ITS)

Solution Description

This solution is used within Australia, Canada, the E.U. and the U.S.. It combines standards associated with (None-Data) with those for I-I: Secure Internet (ITS). The (None-Data) standards include an unspecified set of standards at the upper layers. The I-I: Secure Internet (ITS) standards include lower-layer standards that support secure communications between ITS equipment using X.509 or IEEE 1609.2 security certificates.

ITS Application Entity Development needed			Click gap icons for more info.
Mgmt Bundle: SNMPv3 MIB	Facilities Development needed	Security Secure Session Alternatives
	TransNet IP Alternatives Internet Transport Alternatives
	Access Internet Subnet Alternatives

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	Static
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	High	High	Moderate
Basis	End entity identity and associated permissions could be contained. This PII could include that of emergency personnel, and could include permissions assigned, all of which, if easily accessed could have a high cost of recover. Flow is not realized by known standards, so it may be possible to lower it to MODERATE in the future, when it can be better characterized.	Assignment of permissions with control over physical communications channels needs the greatest possible protection and cannot be mishandled or manipulated in transit.	While update of this flow may be important, it is a non-real-time service in most cases. Could possibly be LOW.

Security Characteristics	Value
Authenticable	True
Encrypt	True

Authorizing Center --> Other Authorizing Centers:permission request coordination