Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Alert Gateway Group (AGG)

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Alert Gateway Group (AGG)"— Presentation transcript:

1 Alert Gateway Group (AGG)
Status Report to the Commercial Mobile Service Alert Advisory Committee September 19, 2007 Anthony Melone, AGG Leader

2 AGG Progress Since Last Update
Submitted Two Drafts on Alert Gateway Requirements August 9th: Third Draft September 7th: Final Draft Completed all Deliverables Finalized Alert GW filtering and mapping logic from CAP to CMAC protocol Set alert expiration to one hour if not provided Finalized Alert GW message construction logic to support both free format text and automatic text generation Use CAP parameter for free format text For automatic text generation, use canned text “in this area” for area effected instead of listing area names to meet the CMA message length limitation Limit the sender agency to 12-character if necessary

3 Alert Gateway Requirements
Outline of requirements is as follows: Alert Gateway Architecture Security System capacity and Performance Interfaces and Protocols Protocol Mapping CMS Provider Profiles Reporting Performance Testing

4 Summary of Draft Conclusions
Alert Gateway Architecture Flexible Architecture Geo-redundant Security Requirements Authentication and Authorization At both B and C interfaces Assumed that B Interface is within government defined “trust-model” C interface will support non-proprietary standards-based security (e.g. IPSec, SSL) Gateway locations will be physically secured

5 Summary of Draft Conclusions
System Capacity and Performance Capacity Based on historical data the Alert Gateway should be designed to support 25,000 CMA’s per year. Design peak rate of 30 alerts per second. Buffering The Alert Gateway shall support two queues per CMSP Gateway One queue for buffering the Presidential alerts Another queue for buffering non-Presidential alerts The processing of Presidential alerts takes priority over non-Presidential alerts Non-Presidential alerts are processed sequentially as received

6 Summary of Draft Conclusions
Interface and Protocols B Interface Documented, Non-proprietary standards based (likely IP) CAP v1.1 protocol (XML) C Interface XML based protocol Protocol Mapping CAP Element to “CMAS” Element (w/CTG, AIG) Translation Logic Defined Default Values CAP Element to Text Verbatims (w/UNG, AIG)

7 Summary of Draft Conclusions
CMSP Profiles CMSP GWs Information (i.e. IP addresses) Geo-Location Coverage on a State Level Reporting Message Logs On-line (90 days) Archived (36 months) General System & Performance Reporting

8 Summary of Draft Conclusions
Performance Testing Connectivity (C interface) Periodic “keep alive” messaging CMSP requested testing after planned and unplanned outages Functional (Alert GW through CMSP GW) Alert GW originated Test Messages Accepted by CMSP GW, but not sent to end user device Support Overall System Testing Will be treated as a normal message with appropriate mapping of CAP element to CMAS element to maintain “test” identity of alert

9 Conclusions The AGG has resolved all the technical issues related to Alert GW. The AGG has completed specifying all technical requirements for the Alert Gateway


Download ppt "Alert Gateway Group (AGG)"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google