About Harmonization Task Group 7
Standards Gap Analysis
To deploy a large scale C-ITS system today, a system architect will find various architectures and tools available, depending on the deployment location:
- European Union: FRAME and the ITS Station architecture specified in the ISO/CEN documents
- United States: The Connected Vehicle Reference Implementation Architecture and its SET-IT toolset
While these architectures are mature, the tools supporting them are still evolving. These resources identify standards identified at the highest level, though differently in different regions. Further, these recommendations may include multiple options and usually are presented without guidance.
In some cases, standards do not exist, and little or no guidance is available to suggest whether a standard would be appropriate. This can result in a significant effort to identify interface requirements and potentially the development of custom solutions which lead to less interoperability.
HTG7 is tasked with filling in those holes. In particular, HTG7 is:
- Identifying which standards are relevant for which interface
- Identifying gaps—detailed recommendations for standards—where they need to exist, what standards are available to use (including alternatives), and where gaps lie.
This analysis is international in scope; it is not limited to a particular set of standards, but rather includes the superset of those in use in the three-party regions. This should enable us to avoid duplicative development efforts – why should one region build something that another has an acceptable solution for? Performing this analysis with an international group also leverages capabilities; drawing on a breadth of expertise leverages limited resources more efficiently than individual silos can.
Common Identifiers
Deployment of C-ITS at some point includes the specification of functional bits: software and hardware that interact. At some point, these objects exchange information, and in order to organize this information, ensure authenticability and effectively identify services, identifiers are used for a variety of used. Two different approaches have been suggested and informally managed thus far. Two identifiers, the ITS-AID and the PSID have been distributed under a joint arrangement from IEEE and CEN. These identifiers exist in a limited space however, and in a variable length field in some protocol data units. Consequently, some identifiers have more perceived value (as they use less bandwidth), and so in addition to ensuring interoperability and compatibility, some aspect of competitive assignment is present.
HTG7 is attempting to reconcile the current informal approach with other suggested approaches to develop a long term method for identifier allocation and registry management. This includes a series of registry roundtable meetings. For further information on the registry roundtable process, please contact the HTG7 executive team at htg7@dot.gov.
