Multi-Access Edge Computing --> Map Update System:
vehicle location data for mapping
This flow may also be implemented by
Connected Vehicle Roadside Equipment --> Map Update System: vehicle location data for mapping Definitions
vehicle location data for mapping (Information Flow): Aggregate vehicle location data collected to support map data creation and refinement.
Multi-Access Edge Computing (Source Physical Object): 'Multi-Access Edge Computing' ((MEC) previously known as mobile edge computing) represents computing devices that operate and are managed like a cloud server, but are deployed at the edge of a network (typically a cellular network, but it could be any network). While not in strict proximity to the transportation network, these systems do benefit from vastly decreased distances to the roadway compared to central systems, and so can provide lower latency than strictly backoffice systems
Map Update System (Destination Physical Object): The 'Map Update System' represents a provider of map databases used to support ITS services. It supports the provision of the map data that are used directly by vehicles (e.g., roadway and intersection geometry data sets), travelers (e.g., navigable maps used for route guidance and display maps used at traveler information points), system operators (e.g., map data used by Traffic Operators to monitor and manage the road network, and map data used by Fleet Managers to manage a vehicle fleet). It may represent a third-party provider or an internal organization that produces map data for agency use. In the latter case, the 'Map Update System' is typically included as part of the center (e.g., a Traffic Management Center) of the infrastructure owner/operator that manages map data. Products may include simple display maps, map data sets that define detailed road network topology and geometry, or full geographic information system databases that are used to support planning and operations.
Included In
This Triple is in the following Service Packages:
This triple is associated with the following Functional Objects:
This Triple is described by the following Functional View Data Flows:
- None
This Triple has the following triple relationships:
| None |
Communication Solutions
-
(None-Data) - Secure Wireless Internet (EU) (43)
-
(None-Data) - Secure Wireless Internet (ITS) (43)
-
(None-Data) - Apache Kafka over Wireless (44)
-
(None-Data) - OMG DDS over Wireless (44)
-
(None-Data) - Eclipse Zenoh over Wireless (44)
-
(None-Data) - OASIS MQTT over Wireless (47)
-
(None-Data) - OASIS AMQP over Wireless (61)
Selected Solution
(None-Data) - OASIS MQTT over WirelessSolution Description
|
ITS Application Entity
![]()
Development needed ![]() |
Click gap icons for more info.
|
||
|
Mgmt
OASIS MQTT DMP ![]() |
Facilities
![]() ![]()
Development needed ![]() OASIS MQTT ![]() |
Security
|
|
|
TransNet
|
|||
|
Access
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|||
Note that some layers might have alternatives, in which case all of the gap icons associated with every alternative may be shown on the diagram, but the solution severity calculations (and resulting ordering of solutions) includes only the issues associated with the default (i.e., best, least severe) alternative.
Characteristics
| Characteristic | Value |
|---|---|
| Time Context | Recent |
| Spatial Context | Regional |
| Acknowledgement | False |
| Cardinality | Unicast |
| Initiator | Source |
| Authenticable | True |
| Encrypt | True |
| Interoperability | Description |
|---|---|
| National | This triple should be implemented consistently within the geopolitical region through which movement is essentially free (e.g., the United States, the European Union). |
Security
| Information Flow Security | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability | ||
| Rating | Moderate | Moderate | Low | |
| Basis | Similar to other vehicle location and motion flows. Individual instances of this flow may betray vehicle behavior however, especially if the vehicle ID is included (as the data flow indicates). | False information here could lead to incorrect or at least suboptimal map information, which negatively effects much of C-ITS. | Individual instances are probably not of tremendous value. More ubiquitous coverage is valuable. So this is LOW for any given instance, but over the broad swath of all vehicles, should provide complete geographic coverage. | |
| Security Characteristics | Value |
|---|---|
| Authenticable | True |
| Encrypt | True |



