Re: VSS/VISS

Thanks Ted

Regards,
Ken Vaughn

Trevilon LLC
6606 FM 1488 RD #148-503
Magnolia, TX 77354
+1-936-647-1910
+1-571-331-5670 cell
www.trevilon.com

> On Jun 3, 2020, at 11:16 AM, Ted Guild <ted@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ken,
> 
> I did get it on yesterday's call, minutes still not fully cleaned up
> but did a pass for this topic and provide you a fuller answer to my
> earlier reply:
> 
> https://www.w3.org/2020/06/02-auto-minutes.html#item01
> 
> On Mon, 2020-06-01 at 08:57 -0400, Ted Guild wrote:
>> Hi Ken,
>> 
>> Short version is yes that flow is feasible. OEM flows may vary and
>> could involve service center getting information indirectly from data
>> off boarded to cloud instead of vehicle itself for a number of
>> reasons.
>> 
>> Diagnostics in the underlying signals data model VSS are up for work
>> soon in GENIVI, currently adding EV. We have coordination and
>> overlapping participants with them. It would be worth discussing ITS
>> equipment signals and diagnostics as well.
>> 
>> I’m looping in the group for input and can see if we can get it on
>> tomorrow’s agenda.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
>> W3C Automotive Lead 
>> http://www.w3.org
>> 
>>> On May 29, 2020, at 5:13 PM, Kenneth Vaughn <kvaughn@trevilon.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Ted,
>>> 
>>> As a part of my on-going work with the architecture efforts, we are
>>> trying to map our architecture information flows to known
>>> standards. I was wondering if you (or someone you work with) could
>>> confirm whether the Vehicle OBE->Vehicle Service Center: vehicle
>>> diagnostic data information flow would be covered by the VISS/VSS
>>> standards, and if so whether my proposed communications stack is
>>> appropriate.
>>> 
>>> You can see the context of this information flow at 
>>> https://local.iteris.com/arc-it/html/servicepackages/sp204.html#tab-3
>>> . You can see details about what is supposed to be in this
>>> information flow by clicking on the link. If there are any other
>>> information flows shown that you think would be covered by VSS, I
>>> would also be interested in knowing.
>>> 
>>> My proposed communication stack would be something like
>>> 
>>> Information (i.e., OSI end application): VSS
>>> Facilities (i.e., OSI Application, session, and presentation): VISS
>>> TransNet (i.e., OSI Transport and Network): standard IP stack
>>> (i.e., UDP or TCP over IP)
>>> SubNet (i.e., OSI Data Link and Physical): Internet alternatives
>>> (e.g., any wired or wireless technology)
>>> Management: None needed
>>> Security: Standard set of alternatives (e.g., (D)TLS with either
>>> X.509 or IEEE 1609.2 certs)
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your help. It would be great to be able to give
>>> recognition to the good work that W3C is doing.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Ken Vaughn
>>> 
>>> Trevilon LLC
>>> 6606 FM 1488 RD #148-503
>>> Magnolia, TX 77354
>>> +1-936-647-1910
>>> +1-571-331-5670 cell
>>> www.trevilon.com
>>> 
> -- 
> Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
> W3C Automotive Lead
> https://www.w3.org/auto
>