Traffic Management Center --> ITS Roadway Equipment:
traffic detector control

Definitions

traffic detector control (Information Flow): Information used to configure and control traffic detector systems such as inductive loop detectors and machine vision sensors.

Traffic Management Center (Source Physical Object): The 'Traffic Management Center' monitors and controls traffic and the road network. It represents centers that manage a broad range of transportation facilities including freeway systems, rural and suburban highway systems, and urban and suburban traffic control systems. It communicates with ITS Roadway Equipment and Connected Vehicle Roadside Equipment (RSE) to monitor and manage traffic flow and monitor the condition of the roadway, surrounding environmental conditions, and field equipment status. It manages traffic and transportation resources to support allied agencies in responding to, and recovering from, incidents ranging from minor traffic incidents through major disasters.

ITS Roadway Equipment (Destination Physical Object): 'ITS Roadway Equipment' represents the ITS equipment that is distributed on and along the roadway that monitors and controls traffic and monitors and manages the roadway. This physical object includes traffic detectors, environmental sensors, traffic signals, highway advisory radios, dynamic message signs, CCTV cameras and video image processing systems, grade crossing warning systems, and ramp metering systems. Lane management systems and barrier systems that control access to transportation infrastructure such as roadways, bridges and tunnels are also included. This object also provides environmental monitoring including sensors that measure road conditions, surface weather, and vehicle emissions. Work zone systems including work zone surveillance, traffic control, driver warning, and work crew safety systems are also included.

Communication Solutions

Solutions are sorted in ascending Gap Severity order. The Gap Severity is the parenthetical number at the end of the solution.

Selected Solution

EU: UTMC Data - UTMC

Solution Description

This solution is used within the E.U.. It combines standards associated with EU: UTMC Data with those for I-F: UTMC. The EU: UTMC Data standards include upper-layer standards required to implement center-to-field communications using the UTMC Framework. The I-F: UTMC standards include lower-layer standards that support secure center-to-field and field-to-field communications using simple network management protocol (SNMPv2). While SNMPv2 offers some security capabilities, implementations are strongly encouraged to use SNMPv3 to ensure adequate security.

ITS Application Entity

UTMC TS004.006
Click gap icons for more info.

Mgmt

IETF RFC 1907
Facilities
Security
Mind the gap

IETF RFC 9147
TransNet

IETF RFC 768
IP Alternatives
Access

Internet Subnet Alternatives
TransNet TransNet

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 Local
Acknowledgement True
Cardinality Unicast
Initiator Source
Authenticable True
Encrypt True


Interoperability Description
Local In cases where an interface is normally encapsulated by a single stakeholder, interoperability is still desirable, but the motive is vendor independence and the efficiencies and choices that an open standards-based interface provides.

Security

Information Flow Security
  Confidentiality Integrity Availability
Rating Moderate Moderate Low
Basis Control flows, even for seemingly innocent devices, should be kept confidential to minimize attack vectors. While an individual installation may not be particularly impacted by a cyberattack of its sensor network, another installation might be severely impacted, and different installations are likely to use similar methods, so compromising one leads to compromising all. DISC: THEA, WYO believe this to be LOW: encrypted, authenticated, proprietary; but should not cause severe damage if seen Control flows, even for seemingly innocent devices, should have MODERATE integrity at minimum, just to guarantee that intended control messages are received. Incorrect, corrupted, intercepted and modified control messages can or will result in target field devices not behaving according to operator intent. The severity of this depends on the type of device, which is why some devices are set MODERATE and some HIGH.. From THEA: should be accurate and not be tampered with; could enable outside control of traffic sensors but should not cause severe harm, but could cause issues with traffic sensor data received and be detrimental to operations Control flow availability is related to the criticality of being able to remotely control the device. For most devices, this is MODERATE. For purely passive devices with no incident relationship, this will be LOW. All devices should have default modes that enable them to operate without backhaul connectivity, so no device warrants a HIGH.. From THEA: want updates but delayed information will not be severe; should be able to operate from a previous/default control/config. DISC: WYO believes this to be MODERATE


Security Characteristics Value
Authenticable True
Encrypt True