(None-Data) - Guaranteed Secure Wireless Internet (ITS)
Description:
This solution is used within Canada and the U.S.. It combines standards associated with (None-Data) with those for I-M: Guaranteed Secure Wireless Internet (ITS). The (None-Data) standards include an unspecified set of standards at the upper layers. The I-M: Guaranteed Secure Wireless Internet (ITS) standards include lower-layer standards that support secure communications with guaranteed delivery between two entities, either or both of which may be mobile devices, but they must be stationary or only moving within wireless range of a single wireless access point (e.g., a parked car). Security is based on X.509 or IEEE 1609.2 certificates. A non-mobile (if any) endpoint may connect to the service provider using any Internet connection method.Relevant Regions:
- Canada
- United States
Comm Profile: I-M: Guaranteed Secure Wireless Internet (ITS)
Comm Class: WAN - Wide Area Network
Standards in Profile:
| Level | Standard |
|---|---|
| Access | Wireless Internet Alternatives (NA) |
| Mgmt | Bundle: SNMPv3 MIB |
| Security | Secure Session Alternatives |
| TransNet | IETF RFC 9293 TCP |
| TransNet | IP Alternatives |
Data Profile: (None-Data)
Standards in Profile:
Solution Issues Severity: 43
The severity issue score calculation only includes issues associated with standards that are included by default.
Solution Issues:
| Default | Severity | Name | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| False | Low | Overlap of standards (Minor) | Overlap | Multiple standards have been developed to address this information and it is unclear which standard should be used to address this specific information flow. However, as this information transfer is infrastructure-based, agencies can deploy a solution throughout their jurisdiction with minimal downside and can use gateways to connect to other technologies. |
| False | Low | Time synchronization | Performance / Applicability Gap | The standard requires a highly accurate time shared between participants. |
| False | Medium | Overlap of standards | Overlap | Multiple standards have been developed to address this information and it is unclear which standard should be used to address this specific information flow. |
| False | Medium | Uncertainty about trust revocation mechanism | Security Gap | The mechanisms used to prevent bad actors from sending authorized messages is unproven. |
| False | Medium | Unvetted by community | Standardization Gap | The proposed solution uses a suite of standards that is accepted within some communities, but has not necessarily been accepted for use within the context of this information triple. |
| False | High | Regulatory Issue | Standardization Gap | Deployment of this standard is subject to regulatory approval, which is not currently expected to be granted for deployments in the near-term. |
| True | Medium | Outdated security reference | Security Gap | The standard solution includes an outdated security reference. |
| True | High | Draft not available (Critical) | Standardization Gap | The standards development organization has established a work item for the subject standard but a draft is not available for this critical feature to enable the interface. The draft may be missing due to the work item being new or simply a lack of activity on the work item. |
| True | Ultra | Data profile not defined | Data Profile Gap | Performance, functionality, and the upper-layers of the OSI stack have not been defined for this information flow. |