Traffic Management Center --> Parking Management Center:
transportation operational strategies

Definitions

transportation operational strategies (Information Flow): Operational strategies for each operating agency in a transportation corridor, downtown area, or other travel-impacted area, providing an integrated operations strategy for the freeways, tollways, arterials, transit services, parking facilities, and other transportation-related facilities in the area. These strategies can include dynamic adjustments to transit fares and tolls, parking fees and restrictions, dynamic lane restriction changes, and other active demand management strategies.

Traffic Management Center (Source Physical Object): The 'Traffic Management Center' monitors and controls traffic and the road network. It represents centers that manage a broad range of transportation facilities including freeway systems, rural and suburban highway systems, and urban and suburban traffic control systems. It communicates with ITS Roadway Equipment and Connected Vehicle Roadside Equipment (RSE) to monitor and manage traffic flow and monitor the condition of the roadway, surrounding environmental conditions, and field equipment status. It manages traffic and transportation resources to support allied agencies in responding to, and recovering from, incidents ranging from minor traffic incidents through major disasters.

Parking Management Center (Destination Physical Object): The 'Parking Management Center' manages one or more parking lots by providing configuration and control of field infrastructure, user account management and interfaces with financial systems to manage payment. This p-object takes the back office portion of the Parking Management System's functionality as it was defined in ARC-IT 8.3 and prior.

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:

This Triple has the following triple relationships:

None

Communication Solutions

Solutions are sorted in ascending Gap Severity order. The Gap Severity is the parenthetical number at the end of the solution.

Selected Solution

(None-Data) - Secure Internet (ITS)

Solution Description

This solution is used within Australia, the E.U. and the U.S.. It combines standards associated with (None-Data) with those for I-I: Secure Internet (ITS). The (None-Data) standards include an unspecified set of standards at the upper layers. The I-I: Secure Internet (ITS) standards include lower-layer standards that support secure communications between ITS equipment using X.509 or IEEE 1609.2 security certificates.

ITS Application Entity
Mind the gap

Development needed
Click gap icons for more info.
Mgmt
Facilities

Development needed
Security
Mind the gapMind the gap
TransNet
Access

Internet Subnet Alternatives
TransNet TransNet

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Access Access

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

ITS Application ITS Application

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Mgmt Mgmt

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Facility Facility

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

Security Security

TempBCL2 TempSTDL2

TempBCL3 TempSTDL3

TempBCL4 TempSTDL4

TempBCL5 TempSTDL5

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 True
Cardinality Unicast
Initiator Destination
Authenticable True
Encrypt True


Interoperability Description
Regional Interoperability throughout the geopolitical region is highly desirable, but if implemented differently in different transportation management jurisdictions, significant benefits will still accrue in each jurisdiction. Regardless, this Information Flow Triple should be implemented consistently within a transportation jurisdiction (i.e., the scope of a regional architecture).

Security

Information Flow Security
  Confidentiality Integrity Availability
Rating Moderate Moderate Moderate
Basis No PII is involved. However this flow should contain coordinated response information: how various transportation related entities respond to different conditions. This type of information is block intelligence that could be useful to an attacker or criminal, and thus should not be distributed in the clear. If this information is corrupted or modified, transportation management entities may not have well integrated plans for one or more operational scenarios, impacting mobility and safety in those conditions. Given that this data exchange is likely the product of personal work between agencies, and that follow up is likely, justify MODERATE and not HIGH. Probably not updated often, but could contain large amounts of information; additionally in times of crisis may need some more update, so MODERATE justifiable.


Security Characteristics Value
Authenticable True
Encrypt True