ii
`
`
`
`An [06 Communications Publication
`Volume 6. Number 23 June ll, I989
`
`
`Diaz Dennis
`
`l
`
`lanned
`Merrill L nch’s
` lobal netyvgb
`
`WORLD
`ETWORK
`I atheunusuallytitllsnt-NetworkingStrataulas
`
`
`
`
`A: pan at u two-your, “50 miuion
`mm with '01. Hurt! Lynch
`
`“tumult-1601.1 Ilmto
`ittevoonn-ct 14 motor us. it».
`LM‘
`WW llnk! will “I
`
`
`
`Imam-v 600 the. Into “network.
`,
`— mm
`In!“ Mun (lump.- r-Ii
`
`
`
`
`Iwflhuklmflm T-I) :
`
`— wt binge
`4
`
`
`tawny: Er SUSAN .l 0mm
`mouc mom can? Mvm cc.
`Wm M m...“
`
`
`decision may .
`handcuff FCC
`By Anita Ya"
`Washtnutoo Bureau Chie‘
`WASHINGTON.
`I).(‘.. — FCC
`Commissioner lhitrieu Din Deit-
`nis last yyeek threw into question
`the late of AT&T'S eontroyersial
`land 1% and other communica-
`tions issues pending before the
`agency “hen slte removed her-
`sclfl'rom voting on the matters.
`l'nder federal rules. FCC t'om-
`missiouers are requrred to re-
`mote themselves from young —
`a process known as rectisal — on
`any issue that may posed conflict
`of interest,
`Diaz Dennis. LI vocal opponent
`of Tariff
`l‘i.
`removed hersell
`from voting on that proceeding
`and lo others. A move that could
`stall
`the agency hetutise it no
`longer has enough members for it
`quorum.
`\ot only is the fate of the l‘ I
`items at stuht‘. but all Ititiopera ‘
`tiims Ulllltl grind to it llJll if Dial.
`Ileiuus’
`leayes the agenty
`iler
`term as tommissioner t‘\p|l'l’h on
`June it! and <t|l|fC¥§ my , she has
`begun discussing ioh opportuni
`ties “till one or more I.i\\ lit ms.
`1'th requrres her I'ecusal
`lrout
`any ltItiproCt-etlmgs mithit‘h the
`firms have an interest.
`If Dial Dennis leaves the [LC
`the torniiiission ytoultl not how
`I (rm/Inner! on page (i/
`
`
`
`Imaging system suppliers
`:turn to PC net standards
`
`Lower cost image management systems based
`. on oif—the-sheli components could spur usage.
`By Susan Bradenbach
`according to UN studies
`West Coast Bureau Chiet
`.«\ staggering _’.I billion new
`
`SAX I'R\\’(II. 20 W Industry
`paper documents are being filed
`standard lot'itl Ilt‘i\\t)l'lts ale be
`each day. many ofthein. ironii‘al:
`ginning to play‘ an important role
`|\ generated by computer
`in the “.Ir against paper accord
`Part of the prolilem is that the
`ing ln;lllt‘ll(lt't'\ at Iheannual As-
`onlyuay tosttire many files. like
`sociation for
`Information and
`application iorni‘ “llll signs
`Image \lanagement t \l|\l) ion-
`tttres is in paper or image form
`ft'l't‘llt‘t‘ here last \yeelt
`lint
`imaging systems. hate lteeii
`llt'\piit' automation efforts of
`beyond the reach oI'niost oflit‘es
`the past few decades. more than
`Turnkey imaging sy stems that
`now ofull di moments in the soon
`rligtti/e dottinieins .iiid proyiile
`to 21W still stored as paper and .ts
`Ior
`t'lt‘L’lrUlllL' storage and re-
`I'ety as 1% are ”1 electronic I'ornL
`( rim/flirted on page W]
`
`'
`
`
`
`. ulyout Siltt)niillionayearaiidin
`(luded proy isions for a carrier to
`buy most ol \1errill lynch \ nee
`\yorlt equipment. proyide net
`
`Merrill Lynch to sign
`MCI as lead carrier
`
`Five-year, $150 million contract, MCl's largest
`ever, promises to save brokerage $100 million.
`By Burton Crockm
`w—
`NIN YORK — \lcrrtll Lynch é‘x
`(Jo . lot. this week is expected to
`sign ~.i
`fl\‘t‘-\t".il‘, SISll nnllion
`contract \y'ith 'lICI Communica-
`tions Corp. heret giving the earri-
`cr nmstot Merrill Lynch‘s domes
`lit and mtemationzil
`sMIIClIt’tl
`voice and prrvate-line htismess
`The contract
`represents the
`transmission sen icesromponcnt
`of a request for proposal Merrill
`Lynch issued nine months ago
`seekinga vendor to but and man-
`age nearly its entire netuorlt.
`The custom network contract
`promises to saw Merrill Lynch
`roughly Slut) million (net five
`years. mostly by leyei'tging \‘ol-
`time discounts.
`at‘wrding to
`Brute Turkstrui
`the company's
`seniortice president ol'glohal in
`iortiutinu sertites
`‘ \\e felt we had a lot oi pm
`i hasing ptmt‘l'lll‘dl we weren't ei
`
`moyi oitlie tompany‘s transmis-
`sion wry ices
`Only
`the transmission ser'
`yices portion of the RFP was
`awarded
`
`l' continued on page Ii)
`
`INSIDE
`
`my... -_\«
`
`“my.” .
`
`“r a... ,.
`
`y
`
`N0 challenge
`I. k .
`.1
`it:i::‘:i:‘.i.‘:'.i.i:f~“~"“““““-‘~‘*i~v i in sight for
`l'lieorigmal RI‘I’\\;I.\\;lllI(‘tlat
`y
`Big 3 carriers
`By Bob Brown
`and Gail ammo
`w—
`Despite consolidation among
`second-tier long distance tarri-
`err: in the past year. ohsen ers' siy'
`it's unlikely a fourth maior t‘ii'i‘r
`er “1“ emerge to rhullenge the
`hie Illl‘t't' — -\T&T. \Itil (aiminii-
`nications‘ Corp. and IS Sprint
`(‘oriinitinit'ations (In
`The major tun-ten dominate
`the long distance industn' “Ilh
`an array ol sophisticated st'r-
`\ It‘t‘s. advanced neoiorlt facilitim
`and geographic reach that would
`he dillitult and tostly for other
`Carriers to match
`Analysts say II is unlikely that
`set‘ond-tk'i' carriers. even those
`shelled by mergers and acquisi
`Iltllls. “Ill tliallenge \‘I‘t\'-'I'. \itil
`and l 5 Sprint tor the role of pri-
`mary car'ier among maior users.
`Mule a lonrth major national
`carrier Ii unlikely to arise some
`sriy that iiitreastiigly piiyterl'iil te-
`gionul payers could emerge to
`thallenge the hig carriers in key
`geographical areas
`Currently: AT&T. \ltil and ['8
`(twill/trier] on page ~73)
`
`\\'(irlt' management and supply
`
`
`
`
`NETLINE
`AAA
`
`APPLE PREPS T0 l'NVElL Il\
`broadest
`set of connectivity
`products to date. Page 2
`
`NORTHERN TEL. HPget ready
`to provide integrated tone and
`data applications .it
`the desk
`top. Page 2,
`IN MAJOR MARKET TESTS. a
`trill booth net eases ((tllt‘fillill
`()fltllls for commuters Page i
`
`SERVICE MERCHANDlSl-Zopts
`
`for a \M'I' net that ("Is tosts
`and transaction times Page 4.
`us. BUSINESSES FLEE from
`\ iolence-torn lieiimg. lktge -I.
`START-UP ASPIRES to build
`ll.llitlll\\'l(l(‘ data net for mobile
`t'ommumcatioiis Page 0
`THE TECHNOLOGY EXISTS.
`hut is there really -.i market for .t
`lay,“statiner,"primerg‘eopier,i
`phone machine? Page ill.
`
`axxxuawurxmn i :4 a
`
`90189 [H
`
`60836 NI'i'U
`GB 8332 N 0C2
`SNDILISIFIODU SWISBS
`IND
`036 S'lBS emu NJB'JNIHDS 3360MB?
`Q-EVQBt’EDiNt
`I
`QOTQb LISXCI-S
`
`5Q.
`
`E E
`
`FEATURE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`X400 standards only
`need crowning touch
`Dy 0mm Bun
`
`WI
`
`n the standards develop—
`ment chess game, the definition
`of conformance
`test
`suites
`marks the endgame, or final
`stage. The. end amc in the do
`velopmcnt of
`e I984 X400
`Message Handling System stan-
`dard neared its conclusion in
`
`February I989, as the
`am
`
`of the 1988 X400 and X500
`standards process began.
`
`Thistook place, appropriate
`
`ly enough. in Bern, Switzerland.
`where citizens often play chess
`using
`lit-high figures on
`
`
`(continued onpage 32)
`
`
`Page 1 of 5
`
`AT&T EXHIBIT 1015
`
`

`

`
`
`FEATURES
`
`
`
`
`
`Endgame
`
`the International Standards 0r~
`gznwation ( lSO) tltld lllf‘cmls'lll-
`tatire Committee on lntcrnation
`dl Tt'lt'pltonr and Tt'Zt-grztpliy.
`
`(.()\"ll\l FD FRO“ PKGE I
`\tll,‘.tr:'\ painted on tho llm't'ltK'ttI
`outstdt‘
`the Pnlazzo di
`I’ti'litt-
`llWlll.
`.\ WU. an: Open systt‘ms lntcr-
`(Ulilit‘t'llull Handard.
`support:
`Why conformance testing?
`mnltixt-ndor ('lt-ctronic until and
`()onformancv tt-sting is de-
`fined as the process of dott‘rmin
`h also designed to carry all types
`of ltlt‘xfilxt')
`‘lltli
`.13 t'lt't’trotiit
`ing how closely it product atllll'rt’h
`
`to it standard Major computer
`(ldl'd mtcrch
`gt) traffic and Uf-
`fzt'c
`Document
`Al’L‘hilt’flllrt'
`tendors that
`implement
`stan—
`dards
`l'lt’l‘d
`iii-house
`confor-
`(Olin tlocnnirnh Tho X30!) di-
`mance testing facilities‘ and ”MT
`rectory anlft‘s standard sup-
`ports X. it") and other OS] Jppll'
`companies require independent
`certification services Confor-
`Ullmlh'
`by
`storing
`nt'tnorl‘
`addresses and otht'r information
`mance testing and product certi‘
`about nwrs
`fit‘zltitin art‘ critical in lht’ latter
`stages of at standard 5 life cyclt-
`l'hc- \[ mo standard “its origi-
`.\ dmsion of labor
`null)‘ issued in I‘m-t
`has mutt-d butuet‘n
`An updated venion,
`ISO and (ICl'l'T rc-
`Wlth much
`added
`gxirding
`confor-
`ftiiit’tmnnlilt.
`lol-
`mance test suites
`lou'cti
`in
`IQSS
`Vim. .i ~lnnd'.trtl for
`ISO i.\ tIt-linirig tlit'
`(lll'(’('l(it'}'
`services.
`hQSIC methodology
`of conformance test-
`ilppt‘ilt't'd lo' the first
`time in 1088. Both
`ing in the ()(Ho serum
`document
`'lhis docr
`stnnddrds “‘ch dc-
`\t'ltipt-tl
`loiiitlt‘
`by
`unit'nt
`)[it'('lll{’3 tt'sl
`.
`methods and a sys‘r
`811m 134: mem-
`tent of lornial nou-
`titm for describing
`ber 0f”)? Cor/mm-
`test cases ISO IS also
`Iion for Open 5):-
`(COS)
`Iems
`Inlernalimml
`dt'vt‘loping tt-st suites for 0.91 File
`Transfer. Access and Managev
`technical staff Ibis article ts
`his
`indtrtdual contribution
`ntcnt. the OSI Presentation Layer
`and ”10 ()SI Scssmn La) or
`and deer nnl neresm r111 repre-
`sc-nl [bu Haunt offlm‘,
`(continued on page 36)
`
`
`
`
`Definition of
`
`conformance test suites
`
`for X.4OO is nearing
`completion.
`
`llil<l’R,lllu'~ 6 MW HUN DUN.
`
`union “mun-Jun If
`32
`
`Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`\l'NHRk MkviLI\l'NURk \ckviLI
`- ll \L’ {3 10:5?- ll \L’ {3 10:5?
`
`3333
`
`
`
`Page 3 of 5Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`—T—
`EXDGAMF.
`
`(comm 140:!from page 3.?)
`\leanwhile. the CCI’IT is hart.
`clling XAUO and x500. generally
`following the ISO 9646 princi-
`pies. The 1084 X.4(l(irecommen-
`datioos
`contain one section.
`X105, uliiclt is devoted to con-
`formance testing.
`
`An exercise in philosophy
`To a
`large extent. confor~
`mance test methodology is still
`fluid. and the early stages of de»
`lining a conformance test suite
`tend to be somethin of an exer‘
`cise in philosophy. 1' e CCITT de-
`liberations. which took place
`front Feb. 20 to 25 of this year in
`Bern. actually comprised mo
`
`l'ser Agent ( l‘A) protocol. the Pl
`Message Transfer Agent (MTA)
`protocol and the Reliable ‘l'rans-
`to System ( itTS)protocol.
`The P2 UA test suite is shown
`in Column A of figure 1 on this
`page. An X.-ii)0 UA is surrounded
`by an L'pper Tester and a Lower
`Tester. The tipper Tester is a hu-
`man operator or set of command
`scripts that drives the implemen-
`tation under test. initiating mes-
`sages and checking for receipt of
`messages. The Lower Tester is
`software capable of emulating
`valid protocol behavior or exhih‘
`iting invalid behavior.
`The P1 MTA test suite. shown
`in Column 8 of Figure l on this
`
`organizations are both nearing
`completion of their 1981' XAOO
`tester products. Thus. it was natu-
`ral that most of the problem re»
`ports submitted at the meeting
`focused on the bit-level details of
`the executable tests that had been
`so laboriously constructed over
`the past two years. But the meet-
`ing participants also devoted
`some time to looking back at the
`different approaches
`that
`the
`group could have taken.
`For instance. before testing,
`implementors must
`submit
`a
`completed Protocol Implementa-
`tion Conformance Statement de-
`scribing the features their prod-
`uct supports. Yet the CClTl' never
`
`in the short
`least
`problem. at
`term. for vendors selling in both
`the European and North Ameri‘
`can markets.
`It was too late in Bern. howev-
`er. to make maior changes to the
`test suites. Unless serious prob-
`lems develop. no further meeting
`will be held on 1984 X300 until
`the final one in March I990.
`Most l98~i XnOt) meeting par-
`ticipants sta ed on for the meet-
`ing on 19
`X400 and X500.
`which began the following day.
`They arrived with the resolve to
`apply what they had learned from
`developing and implementing
`the
`1981i
`conformance
`test
`suites.
`
`Contigurat ons for testing 1984 X400
`Fig 2'
`
`mmnwmtwnmm
`
`amt-c a'v Susan SLAIEII
`
`meetings of overlapping groups.
`one nearing the end of its charter
`and the other just beginning.
`Thefirstmeetingwasthenext-
`to-last convocation of the CClTT
`Ad Hoc
`Interim Rapporteur
`Group on 1984 X.-lO(l Confor-
`mance Testing. .‘llost members of
`tltis group were affiliated with
`one of two major testing organi-
`7ations — the U S.-based Corpo-
`ration for Open Systems interna-
`tional
`(008)
`and
`Europe‘s
`Conformance Testing Services
`for Wide Area Networks (crs-
`W‘AN‘L both of which will be
`readying formal certification or
`accreditation programs for I981
`X100 in the near future.
`The second meeting convened
`a larger group called tlte CClT'i'
`interim Rapponeur Group on
`1988 X.+00 and X500 confor-
`mance testing.
`Although there were hundreds
`of proposed changes to the 1984
`X1400 test suites, most of the
`purely editorial matters had al-
`ready beeti handled before the
`meetings convened. Substantive
`issues were raised in rapid-fire
`succession and. for the most part.
`resolved by consensus after brief
`discussion.
`No changes were made to the
`basic structure of the Witt x1400
`test suites. The 1984 X.~t05 docu-
`ment specifies the test suites. test
`architecture and methodology to
`be used.
`Three additional documents.
`called Conformance Testing Spe-
`cification Manuals. are part of
`X405 and flesh out
`the test
`suites. These include one each for
`the P2 Inter-Personal Messaging
`
`page. uses a similar approach to
`its P2 counterpart. bttt here an
`.\l’l‘.-\ may be driven by one or
`more X300 [‘As and one Lower
`Tester. During messa e relay sce-
`narios. many Lower esters may
`be used.
`The architecture of the RTS
`test suite is shown in Column C of
`Figure l on this pa c. It uses an
`embedded test me 0d. For we
`ample. the RTS is embedded in-
`side an .‘t'.-iO(J product (or. at
`least. inside an MTA) and has no
`exposed ap lication-layer inter»
`face. There ore. the Upper Tester
`is somewhat limited in iLs ability
`to control and observe the imple-
`mentation under test.
`The actual flesh and bones of
`an OS] conformance test suite are
`the ”test purposes" and the “exe-
`cutable tests." Both of these are
`found In the Conformance Test
`Specification Manuals. Test pur-
`poses are sentences or para-
`graphs describing a test. such as:
`“The implementation under test
`can receive an orderly release re-
`uest and release correctly.“ In
`t ePl and Pltestsuitesoneexe-
`cutable test may serve more than
`one test purpose.
`For example. a single X100
`message contains many fields.
`and its generation or reception
`verifies. at one fell swoop. an im»
`plementatitm's ability to process
`message identification. recipient
`name. trace information and oth-
`er elements. The cross—reference
`part of the Conformance Test
`Specification Manual
`supports
`the mapping of test purposes to
`executable test cases.
`The C05 and (ITS-WAX testing
`
`agreed on a final. standardized
`pro forma. or format for this
`statement.
`A related issue is test case se~
`lection. XAOD is re lete with fea-
`tures supporting e ectronic mes-
`saging. but not all of
`those
`features
`are mandatory. Al-
`though most products will not
`support all the optional features.
`they all must be tested. Titus. a
`product may be conformant with-
`out passing all the tests.
`And as part of the testing pro-
`cess. some sort of selection crite-
`ria must be applied to determine
`which tests to run for each imple-
`mentation being tested.
`Furthermore. since some im-
`plementations will support dif-
`ferent sets of features. it is in the
`interests of interoperability to
`confirm that a product will ban-
`dle receipt of a nonsupported
`item without failing.
`Even trickier are the user in-
`terface issues. X300 defines a set
`ofservices and protocols for mes-
`saging but says nothing about
`how sen-ices are interfaced to a
`user. For example. a user inter-
`face is not required to display the
`interpersonal message ID, which
`uniquely identifies a message. In
`testing. however. how does one
`determine that this field was re-
`ceived or sent correctly and thata
`test was passed if no information
`is displayed?
`As it stands. each l98~i XAOO
`testing organization will have to
`determine real effects and test
`case selection criteria indepen-
`dently and then attempt to har-
`monize procedures with other or-
`ganizations. This
`could be
`a
`\‘ET‘ORK VoDRlD ”[le I I 1909
`36
`
`"we have a mixture of new
`bands and old hands." said John
`Halliwell. OCl'l'l' rapporteur and
`head of the conformance testing
`and quality section of British
`Telecommunications P105 in-
`formation Services Standards di-
`vision. "It will be quite interest
`ing to see how they interact.
`i
`expect we‘ll be discussing a lot of
`philosophy."
`
`
`Each 1984 X.400
`
`testing organization
`will have to
`
`determine test case
`
`selection criteria
`
`independently.
`AAA
`
`The I988 group was much
`larger than the 1984 group, com-
`prisin
`additional
`representa-
`tives
`in various European or-
`ganizations that are looking at
`conformance issues. as well as
`several Nonh American and Eu-
`ropean computer vendors. elec-
`tronics firms and telecommuni-
`cations service providers. There
`was even a representative from
`Shanghai. China — Zhartg
`Shiyong — who had spent the
`last
`few years apprenticing at
`British Telecom in England.
`
`Page 4 of 5
`
`“We‘re here to help the work
`get started on the right track.“
`one representative from a L18.
`corporation said.
`"After
`that.
`we'll leave the details to the con-
`formance test people.
`l’nt not a
`conformance tester."
`The group be an by renewing
`the agenda. whic was to produce
`framework
`document
`that
`a
`would guide in the development
`of initial test purposes for the var
`ious test suites in l988 X400 and
`X500. This document must be
`completed fairly quickly in order
`to serve as the basis for the devel-
`opment of regional 1988 X300
`and X500 test conformance
`suites, such as one by (ITS-WAN.
`which is slated to commence de
`velopment in 1990.
`Also, CCITT‘s X.-iOD and
`X500 conformance testing work
`must maintain a common ap-
`proach with its ISO counterpart
`—— the L'pper Layers Confor-
`mance Testing group. which is
`defining conformance test suites
`for other OSl applications and
`lower communications layers.
`
`Reviewing contributions
`There were a number of con-
`tributions regarding the X500
`Directory
`Access
`Protocol
`(DAP). Some of these broke new
`ground by classifying the DAP
`protocol elements in a tree struc-
`ture that would lend itself to the
`derivation of groups of test pur~
`poses.
`Only one contribution. how-
`ever. dealt with the Directory Sys-
`tem Protocol (DSP). DAP gov-
`erns only simple access between
`a client Directory Lber Agent and
`a server Directory System Agent.
`while DSP specifies
`rotncols for
`complex distribut
`access that
`affects multiple Directory System
`Agent servers. Because of its
`complexity. D5? is not being as
`widely implemented as DAP.
`However. British Telecoms Hal-
`liwell says. “We want to have the
`basic structure in place for any-
`one who wants to do some work
`on DSP."
`The controversial X.~iOO and
`X. 500 security features seem des-
`tined to simmer on the back bum-
`er until more expertise is devel-
`oped in this area.
`One paper from the Nether-
`lands proposed an objectorient-
`ed method of developing test
`suites. While the group was inter-
`ested in the paper‘s ideas. it did
`not wish to deviate substantially
`from the [SO approach of having
`three categories of tests for every
`protocol — Basic interconnec-
`tion Tests, Capability Tests and
`Behavior Tests. However. an ob-
`iect-oriented or functionorient-
`ed approach could be used infor-
`mally in the preliminary break-
`down of test groups.
`A baker's dozen
`After the preliminary discus-
`sion of contributions was com
`plete. the group took im entory of
`the document set to be produced.
`iigure 3 on page 5‘ lists the 15
`protocols that comprise l088
`X400 and X500. Note that PI
`
`

`

` W
`ENDGAME
`
`
`
`(the X400 MTA protocol) and
`RTS appear once each for i988
`and 1984,;1nd that the Proscntu-
`tion Layer and Association (Lon
`tioi Service Element (ACSEJ are
`listed with [SO document num
`hers.
`SoVoral new protocols also ap-
`pear: they are PS ('X. 400 remotc
`{34). P? (X. 400 Message StoreJ.
`Remote Operations Scm‘ce Eli:
`mcnt (ROSEJ and, of course the
`.-‘(500 DAP and DSP. Each of
`these protocols will
`require :1
`Protocol
`implementation Con-
`formance Statement, and all but
`the 1984 RTS. Pi and P2 proto-
`cols will require a new Tom Suite
`Structure document with groups
`of test purposes All protocols
`will
`require an Abstract Test
`Suite. containing the detailed
`specifications for each test. ”Vb
`stract Test Sui Les for 3938 x400
`and X500 are still under clove!»
`opmcot.
`'iliitii the agenda. methodolo-
`gV' and exported output agreed
`upon the. meeting split
`into
`Limiting groups to address thc
`various protocols.lTEach group
`was mandated to lay out the int;
`
`and
`
`structure
`suite
`test
`that
`groups of test purposes.
`For the most part this was :1
`straightforward task. isith g1cups
`of test purposes following logi—
`cally from the. applicable proto~
`col tree The 1988 P1 and RTS, as
`Well as the i988 P3 (P23) did not
`differ greatly from their 1984
`counter-tarts. There were. how”
`
`ever a (In surprises in the X. 5110
`and tho PS/PT areas. as well as
`some non issues for testing cm-
`bedded protocols
`The group working on X Sill)
`(laterin:net! thatll w.15 impossihlc
`to fully dotclop the DA? tree into
`groups of test purposes without
`adding 21 wholly separate branch
`called “Schema integrity Tests,"
`which would cover all
`the data
`typos that can be stored in thc diI
`rectory. Tho 34.500 stundnrd do
`lines a number of standard obicci
`classes {records} and uttrihutc
`(field) types, but support for all
`of those is not n1 undatong.
`Service;
`Thus,
`Directory
`Agents may support different sets
`of data types. Con l'ortuancc tcszs
`against
`the directory protocol
`should employ some minimum
`
`set of object classes and attrib-
`utes. while tests against schema
`or dirccion- information content
`
`should cover all possible data
`types
`The P5 (Rcmotc 1.5.4) and 1’?
`(Message Store) protocols were
`horses of another color {soc Fig-
`ure 3.. this page}. Although conv
`l’ornmnce Vest suites generally fo-
`cus on 21 single protocol it pLOVed
`impossible to contemplate tcst
`3119. P5 VVithout simultaneously
`testing P? This nnomalv arose
`outaust- the X400 McsVIagc Storo
`interacts with the MTA to provide
`:1 message data base service for
`the 1:.»1. The i"? ('lit-to—Mcssagc
`Store) protocol input to the Mos,
`sage Store often results in 93
`(Message Store-t1:-~li'i‘AJ proto—
`col input to the MTA. Thus, one
`cannot test the input P5 VVithont
`snuultzncousiy monitoring the
`PT.
`
`the grottptdisc usscd
`.lI’innllV.
`new approaches that might be:
`taken tor testing embedded pru-
`Lot‘ols. All thc applicationlayer.
`onlitics. m Directory" [Nor Agent.
`Directory Son-ice Agent. Lin. Sl'l‘A
`and Message Store m require tho
`
`sem‘ccs
`support
`application
`ACSE and ROSE. Some entities
`also use RTSE. ACSE, RUSH 'and
`’RTSE‘ must be tested in an embed—
`ded fashion. yet the set of son
`vices each provides is finite, and
`there Ls :1 lat e overlap between
`the ways in
`ich the consuming
`entities use these sendces.
`
`is it necessary to provide. a
`separate. set of embedded test
`purposes {or ACSE, ROSE and
`RTSE under each protocol group
`ing? Hopcfuilv not it should he.
`posriiiilc to dowelop a cunt rehon-
`she set of lost purposes or each
`application support sen-ice and
`in the
`lrasic
`interconnection
`
`chapters of the higher level tcst
`suites, point to the applicable cm—
`hedded test.
`
`1118 Bern meeting concluded
`with 21 completed draft frame
`work document for 1988 X400
`
`As noted earlier.
`
`the WM
`
`X400 test suite is. basically iiIVI
`ishcd, and its authors have put it
`into practice in the implementa-
`tion of their tester products.
`’lhis experience is now being
`fed back into the standards (torch
`opmcnt cycle. and qualitative im-
`provements -- such as agrco
`moms on the format of 1988
`X400 and XSOD Protocol implo
`mentation Conformance Stato-
`
`ments. and on naming and nota-
`tion schemes common to all test
`
`suites - arc. already visihl c in the
`[988 WVWIV'.
`
`Sonic participants are think-
`ing alum: ways to automate lllt’
`definition of conformance 1cm
`suites. which would eliminate or-
`
`rors and spend the process.
`Vmongthe alternativc:- discusscd
`was the usc of a minimumltased
`editing facility that would undoc-
`
`TostmgX 400 PSand Plproiocois H V
`
`
`
`and X 500 conformance testing
`This document covered all
`the
`
`piotoc [:15 ifexcept DSP, Vi hich had
`no groups of test pinposes). and
`also contained some agreements
`on the Protocol liliplf’lJIE‘fiMiilm
`Conformance Stitcmenr at VV-cii
`215 on running and notation
`schemcs that would appiy to all
`the test suites.
`
`stand the Tree and ’l‘ahular (Zom-
`lIinc-Id Notation used to code: osc-
`cuinhic tost cases. Ono such tool
`
`was dcmonsl ratcd by chdish 'I'c-
`locom at the meeting.
`\‘i-‘ith fresh ideas continuing to
`pour in. we. are beginning to “it-
`ucss the evolution of {onion
`innncc lost suite ch-‘ch'ipuiczit
`from 2111 art into :1. scicnrc. a
`
`W L
`
`etters
`continued irom page 29
`
`its. Allthingsconsidctcd thisisa
`VIchI dillicult balancing act tha1
`the casual ohscrvct does not of
`
`is the
`lSDh'
`StiL‘lIled to be that
`quintessential
`r1ctVVIorl~Iing solu-
`tion. so win (3011' [the pint-Ion got
`on \V1th intcgiating their applica-
`tions across different vendor do»
`mains?
`is :t switched
`Actually lSDh'
`service that will become gcncrral-
`l1 mail-able ovci the public not—
`work it will continue to eVolVIc to
`become one of many uctu-odting
`solutions from which users will
`be able to select
`Admittedly it is easy to take
`potshots at {$155. But behind the
`scenes Vendors
`and carriers
`must gIapple. with complex lochI
`nicnl'issues contend with the N'
`garters of the marketplace con-
`side-r the risks that accompanV-I
`research and development. and
`carnIthc burdtIn ol ccsponsihili’n
`for current imcstnicnts in tech—
`nology. plant and human re-
`sources.
`
`in the some time, vendors and
`carriers must not neglect the di~
`verse needs of existing custom-
`
`ten apprcciIute.
`As for the. assertion thzu only
`SottthwItIstci[1 Bell linked its lSllg‘l
`applications over cliffrccot VLIn
`dor domains Vou ignored the fact
`that General DataCnmm and iii»
`
`tachi teamed up to demonstrate
`praCticid {not “forced"J priV'Vttc
`branch cxcltangcrmnh‘iplcxcr ap—
`plications of 15m; over lining Imp»
`ported by both A'fci’f’s MESS :3in
`Northern 'i‘clocorn.
`inc}: 21%
`lot).
`
`if this. isn‘t proof of multchn:
`dor
`integration spread across
`proprietary vendor domains.
`1
`don't know VV-itiit is.
`
`lino Young
`Viccrpi'csidcm of machining
`Gonoral {131211st to. inc.
`
`hiiddlchurp'. Conn.
`
`The editorial "Each of in uizi
`
`Vendor integration dims iSDX :Vl—
`lure" discussed the lSIL‘V' Show
`case at the recent International
`Communications
`Association
`clad Annual Conference and EVI-
`
`Page 5 of 5
`
`positinn in Dallas. The editorial
`claimed that "tho lack of demon-
`strable V'cndoI'—to—vendor
`intcv
`granion {at the ISM Showcasel
`has cast :1 pull over ISDEV‘."
`We bczlicvc the editorial failed
`
`important
`to recognize Several
`points. First. contrary to the unit»
`ct ‘s impression. there not; a sun»
`siflntirli amount of imcgixtium.
`proscu in the number oi VcIndorV
`arming many dil’htcm chicLIs
`and applications on the different
`witches. iliont iii if: {latent \’on
`dons demonstrated ISBN- Voice,
`tint-.1, facsimile and image appli-
`cations running on either the
`.t'l'lt‘l' ilZSS or Northern 'l'elecom,
`inc. DMS-lliil. as well
`215 on
`switches from Siemens AG and
`
`Xiillfiurp.
`Hitachi Anicricu. Ltd. for 0er
`:tmplc, used its new HCXSOUH
`privatc branch exchange to dcm
`LillSiF'dlt" the universality of the
`Primary Rate Interface standard
`by running applications through
`the HMS-3110. even though it had
`previously been certified for
`compatibility with AT&'l"s l’rimu .
`r3: Rate. interface.
`XEJ‘MJRK \Vontn - Inc 12. 1959
`37
`
`Second. contra n‘ to tho edito-
`I‘ial‘s claim there was cvcn \‘L’l‘l
`
`d0?to—Vcndor integration .It the
`application level. Hitachi and
`General DataComm, inc. demon-
`strated sacral ioim applications
`invoiimg the HCXSOUL) mid Gen-
`eral Datumnim s
`318321111134
`Those applications, which includ-
`ed demonstrations of how PrimnI
`n Rate interface links can be an
`of!mind bnc hop to T- 1 net“orks
`conclnschlV showed in the. odi-
`torinl'sVIcIVVn Viocds.‘'hoVV' prod
`ucts and services can be intogrntv
`ed
`across
`different
`vendor
`domnins'
`
`Finally. and most importantly.
`the editorial appears to have
`missed the point of the cntirc
`[SD-N Shoo-case. it was not held
`
`only to demonstrate vendor con—
`nectivity between switches.
`In-
`stead.
`it demonstrated -— and
`some would say for the first time
`.. the true potential of ISBN.
`showing how businesses can take
`advantage. of 15m:
`to reduce
`costs. and increase efficiency
`through such capabilities as dy-
`namic channel allocation.
`
`Thus, there: 2's no pl {ii-6T
`ISBN,
`.15
`the cditorini cisims.
`Rather.
`1luI nmitipic
`l’timsry
`Rate Interface applications wr—
`
`cmplil‘t-
`the types of mitigated
`digital networking services that
`should be identified with this no
`
`room “150V."
`
`Rogor Eraser
`Scnior dire tor of conflicting
`Telcconiniunications Division
`lIiuIchi .l liltl‘ll‘zl, Ltd.
`Norcrosts. (in.
`
`disagrees.
`N'ctwurlt World
`While a few vendors partici-
`pating m the recent Lilla-’Sficiw-
`case at the International Com
`municaii'ons
`ASSOCilZMO?!
`
`meeting in Dallas did link up
`to!!!) other condors to share
`ISBN applications tutors (hf
`jet-em switches for the most
`part :15ch cm01mm;ed Islands
`afmm.
`{I would have been: more
`
`I'lSéfftI/jbr louse attcnd'ees to see
`vendors integrate their 13th
`applications with other trem-
`tiors’ oflérntgs.
`
`~—— The Editor
`
`