This solution is used within the U.S.. It combines standards associated with US: TCIP with those for I–I: Guaranteed Secure Internet (ITS). The US: TCIP standards include upper–layer standards required to implement transit–related communications. The I–I: Guaranteed Secure Internet (ITS) standards include lower–layer standards that support secure communications with guaranteed delivery between ITS equipment using X.509 or IEEE 1609.2 security certificates.
Multiple significant and minor issues. For existing deployments, the chosen solution is likely deficient in security or management capabilities, and the issues should be reviewed and upgrades developed as needed. Some solutions in this category may also be becoming obsolete from an interoperability perspective and if this is the case, then upgrades should be planned as soon as possible. For new deployments, the solution may be viable for pilots when applied to the triples it supports; such pilot deployments should consider a path to addressing these issues as a part of their design activities. The solution does not provide sufficient interoperability, management, and security to enable proper, full–scale deployment without additional work.
| Issue | Severity | Description | Associated Standard | Associated Triple |
|---|
| Encoding rules not defined | High | The standards do not unambiguously define which set of encoding rules to use. | (None) | (All) |
|---|
| Out of date (medium) | Medium | The standard includes normative references to other standards that have been subject to significant changes that can impact interoperability or security of systems and the industry has not specified if and how these updates should be implemented for deployments of this standard. | TCIP – Data | (All) |
|---|
| Secure data access not provided | Medium | The solution does not define rules on how the application entity authenticates requests to accept or provide data. | (None) | (All) |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | SORTA Riverfront Transit Center=>emergency transit service response=>Regional Operations Center |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional 911 Call Centers=>emergency transit service request=>CTC Transit Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional 911 Call Centers=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional 911 Call Centers=>emergency transit service request=>TANK Traveler Information System |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional 911 Call Centers=>emergency transit service request=>TANK Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | KSP Troop Posts=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | KSP Troop Posts=>emergency transit service request=>TANK Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts=>emergency transit service request=>BCRTA Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts=>emergency transit service request=>CTC Transit Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts=>emergency transit service request=>SORTA Transit Dispatch Center |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Operations Center=>emergency transit service request=>University of Cincinnati Shuttle Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Operations Center=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Operations Center=>emergency transit service request=>SORTA Riverfront Transit Center |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Operations Center=>emergency transit service request=>SORTA Transit Dispatch Center |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | SORTA Transit Dispatch Center=>emergency transit service response=>Regional Operations Center |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | TANK Transit System Dispatch=>emergency transit service response=>Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | TANK Transit System Dispatch=>emergency transit service response=>Regional 911 Call Centers |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Local Transit Systems=>emergency transit service response=>Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Kentucky Statewide Emergency Operations Center=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Kentucky Statewide Emergency Operations Center=>emergency transit service request=>TANK Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Indiana Statewide Emergency Operations Center=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Indiana State Police Posts=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | University of Cincinnati Shuttle Dispatch=>emergency transit service response=>University of Cincinnati Department of Public Safety |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | BCRTA Transit System Dispatch=>emergency transit service response=>Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | BCRTA Transit System Dispatch=>emergency transit service response=>Regional 911 Call Centers |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | University of Cincinnati Department of Public Safety=>emergency transit service request=>University of Cincinnati Shuttle Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional 911 Call Centers=>emergency transit service request=>BCRTA Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | CTC Transit Dispatch=>emergency transit service response=>Regional 911 Call Centers |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers=>emergency transit service request=>TANK Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Local Transit Systems=>emergency transit service response=>Regional 911 Call Centers |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Local Transit Systems=>emergency transit service response=>Regional Operations Center |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF=>emergency transit service request=>BCRTA Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF=>emergency transit service request=>CTC Transit Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF=>emergency transit service request=>Local Transit Systems |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF=>emergency transit service request=>SORTA Transit Dispatch Center |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers=>emergency transit service request=>BCRTA Transit System Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers=>emergency transit service request=>CTC Transit Dispatch |
|---|
| Use case not considered in design (medium) | Medium | While the indicated standards nominally address the information flow, the design may not meet practical constraints because this particular use case was not the focus of the design effort. | (None) | CTC Transit Dispatch=>emergency transit service response=>Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers |
|---|
| Data not defined in standard format | Low | The definition of data concepts should conform to ISO 14817–1 to promote reuse among ITS. | TCIP – Data | (All) |
|---|
| Source | Destination | Flow |
|---|
| BCRTA Transit System Dispatch | Regional 911 Call Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| BCRTA Transit System Dispatch | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| CTC Transit Dispatch | Regional 911 Call Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| CTC Transit Dispatch | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| Indiana State Police Posts | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Indiana Statewide Emergency Operations Center | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Kentucky Statewide Emergency Operations Center | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Kentucky Statewide Emergency Operations Center | TANK Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| KSP Troop Posts | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| KSP Troop Posts | TANK Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Local Transit Systems | Regional 911 Call Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| Local Transit Systems | Regional Operations Center | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| Local Transit Systems | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts | BCRTA Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts | CTC Transit Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Ohio State Highway Patrol Posts | SORTA Transit Dispatch Center | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF | BCRTA Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF | CTC Transit Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Ohio Statewide EOC/JDF | SORTA Transit Dispatch Center | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional 911 Call Centers | BCRTA Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional 911 Call Centers | CTC Transit Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional 911 Call Centers | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional 911 Call Centers | TANK Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional 911 Call Centers | TANK Traveler Information System | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Operations Center | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Operations Center | SORTA Riverfront Transit Center | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Operations Center | SORTA Transit Dispatch Center | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Operations Center | University of Cincinnati Shuttle Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | BCRTA Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | CTC Transit Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | Local Transit Systems | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | TANK Transit System Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| SORTA Riverfront Transit Center | Regional Operations Center | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| SORTA Transit Dispatch Center | Regional Operations Center | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| TANK Transit System Dispatch | Regional 911 Call Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| TANK Transit System Dispatch | Regional Public Safety Dispatch Centers | emergency transit service response |
|---|
| University of Cincinnati Department of Public Safety | University of Cincinnati Shuttle Dispatch | emergency transit service request |
|---|
| University of Cincinnati Shuttle Dispatch | University of Cincinnati Department of Public Safety | emergency transit service response |
|---|