An automatic off-line feature interaction detection method by static analysis of specifications. Hélène Jouve, Pascale Le Gall and Sophie Coudert

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "An automatic off-line feature interaction detection method by static analysis of specifications. Hélène Jouve, Pascale Le Gall and Sophie Coudert"

Walter Shields
5 years ago
Views:

1 An automatic off-line feature interaction detection method by static analysis of specifications Hélène Jouve, Pascale Le Gall and Sophie Coudert ICFI 05 Leicester France Telecom R&D Université d Évry - LaMI ENST - Laboratoire SoC

2 Introduction Service : extension of a basic system Exemple : POTS, CFB, TCS, CW, etc. Separately designed but integrated on the same network => interactions Solve or prevent interactions => detect them before integration of services of at runtime New challenges : internet telephony

3 Our objectives 1. Detect interactions, 2. At the earliest, from graphical specifications minimize impact of conflicts graphical is easily readable 3. Automatically without supplementary knowledge than the specifications 4. Give an explanation of detected conflict Helps solving conflicts or modify specification

4 Plan 1. Our method for phone services 2. Current and futur works : SIP

5 Our choices operational and graphical specifications compromise between expressiveness and feasibility of computations user point of view, abstraction of the network simple properties formulas such as emitting(a, ringingtone) idle(a) No integration, combination choices, no computed model static method

6 Example of specification : focus on CFB VAR A:POTS dialing(a) VAR B:CFB(C) VAR C:POTS A.call(B) idle(b) idle(b) idle(c) start( rbtone).a idle(b) start(rbtone).a start(rgtone).b idle(c) start(rgtone).c A.onhook start(lbtone).a idle(a) POTS,5,(A,B) POTS,5,(A,C) POTS,10,(A) Aliases Subscriptions and variables declarations Determinism of transitions Invariant properties

7 Main steps of our method diagram of POTS Trigger information of f diagram of f Computation of trigger information Trigger information of f Computation of interactions Interactions between f et f

8 Computing and modelling trigger information Step 1: supress aliases (except loops) Step 2: pair branches and extract non paired branches (trigger) Step 3: annotate non paired branches with intentions

9 Computing trigger information: pairing diagrams VAR A:POTS idle(a) dialing(a) VAR A:POTS dialing(a) VAR B:POTS A.call(B) A.onhook VAR B:CFB(C) VAR C:POTS A.call(B) A.call(B) A.onhook idle(b) start(rbtone).a start(rgtone).b 5 emitting(a,rbtone) emitting(b,rgtone) idle(b) start(lbtone ).A emitting(a, lbtone ) 6 7 idle(a) idle(b) idle(b) idle(c) start( rbtone).a start(rgtone).b idle(b) idle(c) start(rbtone).a start(rgtone).c start(lbtone).a

10 Computing trigger information: intentions VAR A:POTS dialing(a) VAR B:CFB(C) VAR C:POTS idle(b) start( rbtone).a start(rgtone).b A.call(B) A.call(B) idle(b) idle(c) A.call(C) idle(c) idle(b) idle(c) start(rbtone).a start(rgtone).c A.onhook start(lbtone).a A.call(C) idle(c)

11 Computing interactions: direct and indirect at trigger Path A C m S m i C i σ m S C A 1. direct interactions: If Compat σ (C, C ) Subs. σ(a) A Cond. σ(c) C Msg. σ(m) = m Conflict σ(s) ou S D Trigger information of f Trigger information of f D 2. indirect interactions using intentional message

12 Computing interactions : generalization Path C m m C A S mi ci S A Path σ C f mf A f S f m i C i D D Trigger information of f Trigger information of f

13 Example of computed interactions (RBF vs TM et RBF vs CW) A : RBF X : TM S A : RBF B : TM C dialing(a) idle(b) m A.call(B) startplaying(rbfmsg).a startplaying(tmaccueilmsg).a A : RBF B : CW C : POTS S A : RBF B : CW C:POTS C dialing(a) talking(b,c) m A.call(B) startplaying(rbfmsg).a start(cwtone).b

14 RBF vs CW VAR A:RBF dialing(a) A.call(B) VAR B:POTS idle(b) startplaying(rbfmsg).a playing(a,rbfmsg) VAR B:CW VAR C:POTS VAR A:POTS talking(b,c) A.call(B) => idle(b) start(ringbacktone).a start(cwtone).b emitting(b,cwtone) emitting(a,ringbacktone) talking(c,b) {dialing(a), idle(b)}, and {talking(b, C)}) are compatible Trigger match messages Network answers are different

15 Conclusion for this technique number and expressiveness of computed interactions rapidity of computations simplicity of use run on 23 services (FIW contests)

16 Plan 1. Our method for phone services 2. Current and futur works : SIP

17 SIP and VoIP services Services deployed on devices, proxies, etc End systems are more intelligent than phones Work in progress at France Telecom formalism to be adapted algorithms to be adapted Intellectual property issues...

18 CFB and Auto Redial Asip : AutoRedial Aip.invite(Bsip, Asip,Bsip, Asip,(i,invite)) Bsip : CFB(Bsip ) Aip.invite(Bsip, Asip,Bsip, Asip,(i,invite)) 100trying(Asip,Bsip, (i,invite)).aip 100trying(Asip,Bsip, (i,invite)).aip 486busyhere(Asip,Bsip, (i,invite)).aip 180ringing(Asip,Bsip,Bsip, (i,invite)).aip Aip.ack(Bsip, Asip, Bsip, (j, ack)) Asip.subscribe(Bsip, Asip, Bsip, Asip,(k,subscribe))

19 Interactions (by hand) Configuration Bsip : CBF(Bsip ) Asip : AutoRedial Path Aip.invite(... ) 100trying(... ).Aip Trigger request Aip.invite(... ) Conflicting answers 180ringing(... ).Aip 486busyhere(... ).Aip

20 Conclusion Graphic and formal specifications adapted to the domain Fully automatic method automatic computation of problematic configurations no integration Quality and number of found interactions Adaptation of formalism and algorithms : in progress

Observability and Controllability Issues in Conformance Testing of Web Service Compositions

Observability and Controllability Issues in Conformance Testing of Web Service Compositions Jose Pablo Escobedo 1, Christophe Gaston 2, Pascale Le Gall 3 and Ana Cavalli 1 1 TELECOM & Management SudParis