Singapore ICCSllSlTA '92
SELECTION OF A FORMAL DESCRIPTION TECHNIQUE (FDT)
FOR A FDT BASED PROTOCOL CONVERTER
Erry Gunawan, Pek Tong Tan, Nansi Shi
School of Electrical & Electronic Engineering
Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 2263
ABSTRACT
Computer networks are large and complex systems. The use of
natural language to design and analyse communications protocols
will lead to ambiguous representations. This inadequacy of the
natural language gives rise to the many recent research works on
Formal Description Techniques (FDTs). FDTs are methods to
defme the behaviour of an infarmation processing system in a
language with formal syntax and semantics. In this paper, FDT
has been chosen as a basis for the design of protocol converter. A
survey of existing widely accepted FDTs is presented. From this
survey, a selection is made for an appropriate FDT to be used as
the basis for future research work on FDT-based protocol
converter.
1. INTRODUCTION
Protocol conversion is one of the very important research areas
in protocol engineering, because the difficulty of interconnecting
networks or network components which obey different
architectures has become the important inhibitor to computer
communication growth and flexibility in recent years. There is
only one method to solve the difficulty of interconnecting
different networks which obey different architectures, that is to
insert a protocol converter in between the networks.
Communications protwols are complex software systems. They
are sets of rules and procedures that govern interactions among
communication entities and so, are crucial for the functioning of
entities in a computer network. It is difficult to use the natural
language to represent a large and complex system such as
communications protocol successfully. even though they are
more readable for human beings than formal languages. In order
to represent a system completely and unambiguously, the Formal
Description Techniques (FDTs) have to be used. So far, many
FDTs have been developed and used in protocol engineering to
specify complex system. Since FDTs are becoming mature, we
can expect to use a FDT as the basis for our protocol converter
research. Hence a survey was done for the selection of an
appropriate FDT among many existing FDTs.
In this paper, an overview of FDTs is given in section 2. and
more than ten widely adopted FDTs have been surveyed in
section 3. In section 4. the relationship between the protocol
engineering and FDTs is shown. Finally, one FDT is selected as
our proposal for the basis of FDT-based protocol converter
-
188
Q 1992 IEEE
research work.
2. FORMAL DESCRIPTION TECHNIQUES OVERVIEW
FDTs are methods of defining the behaviour of an information
processing system in a language with a formal syntax and
semantics, instead of a natural language.
Communications protocols are so important that they must be
specified completely and implemented correctly for the system to
provide the expected services. The increasing use of the
information processing systems has led to a great deal of
research efforts, and activities in the areas of protocol
engineering and FDTs for communications protocol in the past
decade(l1.
FDTs are important tools for the design, analysis and
specification of information processing system. It is by means of
formal techniques that system description can be produced that is
complete, consistent, concise, unambiguous and precise. This is
only possible if a FDT is self-contained, so that the description
given in a FDT needs not refer to any informal knowledge of the
system described. An important aspect of a formal system is that
it allows analysis by mathematical methods. A FDT that has such
a formal, mathematical basis, can be used to prove the
correctness of specifications. Briefly, an ideal FDT should be
expressive, well-defined, well-structured, and abstract.
The advantages of FDTs are: (i) the resulting specifications are
precise; (ii) the rigorous analysis for completeness and
consistency is possible; (ii) a suitable compiler to process formal
specification to generate partial implementation of protocol may
be built; (iv) the basis for the automated verification and
generation of conformance tests; (v) serves as a documentation
for the protocol; (vi) provides precise communication between
designers who may use this FDT to specify protocols, and
implementors who may implement a protocol described by this
FDT.
3. FORMAL DESCRIPTION TECHNIQUES CATEGORY
FDTs are based on three types of models, namely State
Transition Model (STM), Programming Language Model (PLM).
and Hybrid Model (HM).

3.1. State Transition Models (STMs)
STM is based on Finite State Automation(FSA) whose input
and output are the protocol events. A communications protocol
basically consists of event-driven entities that communicate with
each other through message passing. The behaviour of an entity
can be described in terms of the state transitions that the entity
takes in response to external and internal events. STMs provide
the simplest model for describing protocol entity.
3.1.1. Finite State Machine (FSM)
FSM is the most widely accepted STMs for representing the
communications protocol. Most of the widely used architectures
have been formally described by the FSM [4]. FSM is often
represented by a State Transition Graph (STG) which is a
directed graph, whose nodes represent states and arcs represent
transitions marked with inputs (+) and outputs(-). The State
Transition Table (Smis also often used to assist FSM
representation. It is very common to model a two party protocol
by a pair of interacting FSMs interconnected by two
unidirectional FIFO channels. Transition between states takes
place by the exchange of messages betwecn themselves through
the channels. The pair of STGs used to describe the protocol
machines is referred to as the Protocol Graph (PG).
Some FSMs variants such as Communication FSM
(CFSM)[31[5] are defined particularly for communication
protocol. Some methods have been used to reduce the complexity
of the protocol and analysis, for example, Projections['l] and
PrUningj31.
3.1.2. Petri Net (PN)
PN is widely used in communication area. A PN is a directed
graph which is constituted with a set of two kinds of nodes (Place
and Transition), and a directed arc which connects nodes. The arc
can start from Place to Transition or vice versa. PN is very clear
for representation of activity of communications between two
processes, and can be used as an assistant method with other
FDTs[9][10]. Numerical Petri Nets and Time Petri Nets are
variants of PN, by adding a considerable amount of modelling
convenience[81.
3.1.3. Global State Transition Graph (GSTG)
GSTG is a directed graph whose nodes represent reachable
global states and whose arcs represent transitions between global
states. A Global state S is a twin state S = (<Qi>i=12;
<cij>ij=1,2; and i o j ) where Qi is the current state of process
Pi, and Cij is the current state of channel C(ij) which represents
the sequence of messages in the channel[ll].
3.2. Programming Language Models (PLMs)
PLMs is very powerful to model any protocol, because a
communication protocol executes an algorithmic procedure
which can be described using a language notation as a high level
programming language.
189
Singapore ICCSllSlTA '92
33.1. ACT ONE
ACT ONE is an abstract data type language, and representative
of an important family of algebraic specification techniques, as
well as its use in the OS1 area [14]. The algebraic specification
method is an important class of FDTs.
3.23. LOTOS
LOTOS (Language of Temporal Ordering Specification) was
developed by ISO. The basic idea that LOTOS was developed
from, is that systems can be described by defining the temporal
relation between events in the externally observable behaviour of
a system [12]. LOTOS consists of the description of Process
Behaviours and Interaction based on the Calculus of
Communicating System(CCS), and the description of Data
Structures and Value Expressions based on the ACT ONE.
LOTOS is used to formally specify distributed, concurrent
information processing systems, specially for OSI. In LOTOS.
the system as a whole is a single process that may consist of
several interacting subprocesses, those may in turn be refmed
into sub-subprocesses etc. A process communicates with its
environment by means of interactions. Much of the power of
LOTOS is the result of the parallel composition operator and the
concept of process 'rendezvous'.
3.2.3.G-LOTOS
The G-LOTOS [13] is the result of the work as a joint
ISO/CCITI' effort in 1988. G-LOTOSis a graphical syntax for
LOTOS. The graphical representation offered by G-LOTOS is
meant to provide a 'first glance' recognizability of main features
of the formally described system, including temporal sequencing
of events, parallel system behaviours, and synchronization[2].
3.2.4. CHILL
CHILL (IS0 9496 - CCI'IT High-Level Language). Being an
implementation language CHILL could as well be used as a
specification language. but often it is essential to separate the
implementation details, which are irrelevant for the
understanding, from the semantics.
3.25 ASN.l
ASN.l (IS0 8824, CCITI' X.208 Specification of Abstract
~
Syntax Notation 1) with its encoding rules BER (IS0 8825,
CCI'IT X.209 - Specification of Basic Encoding Rules for
Abstract Syntax Notation 1) [13], is a fruit of IS0 and C C m .
The rules for representing a value of a data type on
communications line are called the 'encoding rules'. ASN.l and
BER were combined into a single language for the X.400 and
denoted as X.409.Then X.409 has been separated into two parts
to permit the specification of multiple transfer syntaxes.
3.2.6. TTCN
7TCN (IS0 9646-3 - Tabular and Tree Combined Notation)
[13] was recommended for use by I S 0 in preference of the
Q 1992 IEEE
 Singapore ICCS/ISITA '92
existing FDTs. T E N was developed and used for precise
specification of abstract test suites [16]. Both the tree and tabular
notation have advantages of understandability and combination
of them &titled T E N arose as the notation of preference.
3.2.7. Z language
The 2 language, developed by the Programming Research
Group at Oxford University, is a general purpose formal
specification language based on the established mathematics of
logic and set theory[l8]. Z can be used for system specification
at different levels of abstraction from high-level functionality to
low-level implementation[19]. 2 also provides a schema
framework in which a system entity or a system operation can be
grouped and named to give well structured specification.
3.3. Hybrid Models (HMs)
These H M s combine the features of the STh4 and PL for
describing protocols. In these models,state transition systems are
augmented with variables and program fragments to give them
added power.
3.3.1. Estelle
Estelle 1211 was developed by I S 0 and the basic idea is that
systems can be described by Extended State Transition Model.
Estelle has the Pascal for foundations and extends it for
distributed system description by adequate mechanisms in order
to handle parallelism and communication. It is used for the
formal description of distributed. concurrent information
processing systems, particularly for OSI. Estelle can describe a
system of nondeterministic sequential components in term of
Module interchanging Interactions through bidirectional
Channels between their Interaction Points associated with an
unbounded FIFO queue. Estelle specification is composed of
several modules which may be dynamically created and released.
Typically. distinct modules realize functions that can be carried
out in parallel. Modules may be nested, exchange information
and synchronize their behaviour. Estelle can build specification
of complex systems by combining descriptions of smaller,
reusable objects.
33.2. SDL
SDL, The CCIIT Specification and Description
Language(CCIIT 2.100). has been developed by the CCITT, for
specifying precisely the functional features of a system and
describing precisely the functional features provided by .an
existing system. SDL is an element in achieving the objective of
international standardization in telecommunications field. It is
being evaluated as a candidate language in the evolving
standardisation of I S 0 and CCllT[28]. SDL has both procedural
and declarative constructs which together provide expressive and
powerful means for modelling specification. The SDL complete
formal model, is described in Meta-IV[26].
190
I Q 1992 IEEE
3.3.3. Others
Extended Finite State Machines(EFSM) are hybrid models in
which, the parts of a protocol that can be captured nicely with a
transition model use FSM. while other parts that are better
captured by program-like descriptions use program language.
Petri Nets with predicates, shared variable techniques also belong
to this HM class. IIhe National Bureau Standards of U.S.A
protocol specification (NBS)was used in writing specification of
several NBS protocol standards, for example, TP2/TP4. The
Department of Defense of U.S.A protocol specification technique
(DoD) was used in rewriting formal specifications of the military
standard for TCPfiP. The IEEE 802 standards for LAN have been
specified using a semi-formal protocol description technique.
4.FDTs AND PROTOCOL ENGINEERING (PE)
The problems in the field of PE may be categorized into
protocol specification. verification, implementation, conversion,
and conformance testing of protocol implementation. PE coexists
with FDTs, because FDTs provide a reliable and steady basis for,
the development of a complete and precise specification; the
verification of the specifications; the functional analysis of the
specifications; the implementation from a specification; and the
conformance testing to meet its specification.
4.1.Specification
Protocols are implementations of services [2S]. Consequently,
a service definition may be refined into protocol specification, if
a precise definition of the service provided by lower layers is
available. The first step is to describe the services that are
provided to users. It can be described in terms of the input and
output behaviour of that layer at its upper interface referred to as
the Service Definitions of the protocol. Protocol must be
specified completely, consistently, unambiguously for a reliable
communication.
4.2. Verification
Protocol must be verified before they are implemented for
interoperability. One may attempt to verify the completeness,
deadlock, termination, cyclic behaviour and boundedness.
Let P be the set of sequences of events implied by the service
specification, Q be the set of sequences of events,visible at the
service interfacegenerated from the protocol entity-entity
interactions. In general a protocol verification should involves
two sides: Q <= P and P<=Q.
4.3.Implementation
A formal specification of a protocol usually consists of
Machine-dependent part, and Machine-independent part which
can be fully specified with FDTs. In a semi-automatically
generated protocol implementation, the Machine-independent
specification with a suitable compiler to translate the
specification into source code in some language such as C should
be used.

4.4. Conformance testing
A standard defines a set of Static and Dynamic conformance
requirements which must be met by the implementation derived
from that standard. A test sequence is applied to an
implementation. and its behaviours are compared with the
expected behaviour of a conformance implementation. Formal
methods exist for generating protocol test sequence directly from
formal specification of protocol. A formal approach will produce
conformance tests which are complete, rigorous and meaningful.
4.5. Conversion
Large computer manufacturers have already developed their
own networks and there are thousands of such vendor-specific
networks running successsfully in the world. Nowadays, the trend
is to interconnect those networks into a larger network, but the
difficulty of interconnecting networks or network components
which obey different architectures is an important inhibitor.
Green[4] has given the reasons why the-problem cannot be solved
simply by the way of convergence with a standard protocol such
as OSI. Hence converters are introduced for interworking
between distributed computer systems. A converter provides for
the necessary adaptation between the communications protocols
used in the interconnected networks. The functional requirement
of a protocol conversion can be specified formally like the
functional requirement of any protocol. Greatly improved
methods are needed for analyzing mismatches between
protocols,and synthesizing conversions that resolve these
mismatches while providing good performance and low cost.
The procedure(conversion) available today starts by analyzing
the set of 'atomic protocol functions' that supports the services.
Use of OS1 as an intermediate set of protocol between two
non-OS1 architecture at some layers shows great promise[32],
and we can use less converters than other methods.
5. CONCLUSION
Recently, FDTs are becoming matured and widely accepted by
academia, and many FDT supported tools have been developed
for use in the complete protocol designe process. As such we see
a great promise to exploit a FDT-based protocol converter. There
are also more important reasons for FDT-based converters to be
preferred apart from those mentioned in Section 2, and they are
the following:
a) Complete and consistent service definition and protocol
specification can be obtained.
b) The mismatch can be analysed rigorously.
c) The converter can be proved to be correct easily.
d) The converter can be built quickly.
e) The converter can be changed quickly to adapt to changes in
the protocol standards.
Unfortunately, at present there is no one FDT good for all
protocol applications. In this paper, a survey of currently
available FDTs to find a suitable one for protocol converter
design and research is given. The criteria used to select the FDT
are the mathematical basis, adoption as standard, application
area, ease in understanding, and implementation difficulties.
If a FDT is defined in an International Standard, the description
191
Singapore ICCSllSlTA '92
is available to all who require it. The directives for the
production of such a standard require a high degree of
international acceptance and technical stability. Any amendment
also requires international agreement. Hence a standard FDT
offers the most useful form of presentation to those who wish to
apply it. It is logical, therefore, to select those FDTs which have
been adopted as international standard such as ASN.l, 'ITCN.
Estelle, LOlDS, SDL and CHILL. Since ASN.l and are
not full FDTs[l7], only Estelle, LOTOS, SDL, and CHILL are
short-listed.
Estelle and LOIDS were developed in the OS1 environment,
while SDL's major application area is telecommunication, and
CHILL is an implementation language. As our attention is
focused on using OS1 as an intermediary for protocol conversion,
Estelle and LOTOS are more appropriate to meet the goal.
However, between these two, Estelle has a reputation in the OS1
community as a more implementation-oriented technique than
UITOS. Hence, Estelle is selected as the FDT for our protocol
conversion research work.
REFERENCES
[l]D Sidhu, A Chung and T P Blumer, "Experience with Formal
Methods in Protocol Development," ACM SIGCOMM.
Computer Communication Review, V01.21, No.?, 1991.
[2] T Bolognesi. 0 Hagsand, D Latella, B Pehrson, 'The
definition of a graphical G-LOTOS editor using the meta-tool
LOGGIE," Computer Network and ISDN System, V01.22.
No.1. August 1991.
[3] D M Kristol, D Lee, A N Netravali, K K Sabnani, "Efficient
Gateway Synthesis from Formal Specifications," ACM
SIGCOMM'91 Conference, pp 89-97,1991.
[41 P E Green, "Protocol Conversion," JEEE Transactions on
C o m m ~ .V0l.C0M-34,
, N0.3, pp 257-268, M a h 1986.
[SI K Okumura, "A Formal Protocol Conversion Method," Proc.
ACM SIGCOMM'86, pp 30-37.1986.
[6] I Groenbaek, "Conversion Between the TCP and IS0
Transport Protocols as a Method of Achieving
Interoperability Between Data Communications System,"
IEEE J Selected Areas Commun.. Vol. S A C 4 N0.2, pp
288-296, March 1986.
[7] S S Lam, "Protocol Conversion," IEEE Trans Software Eng.,
Vol. 14, No. 3, pp 353-362. March 1986.
[SI R Lai, T S Dillon, K R Parker. "Application of Numerical
Petri Nets to Specify IS0 R A M protocol," Proceedings of
the 1989 Singapore International Conference on Networks, pp
168-173, July 1989.
(91 L Logrippo, M Faci and M Haj-Hussein. "An introduction to
LOTOS: learning by examples," Computer Network and
ISDN Svstem Vol. 23. No. 5. Februarv 1992.
P sa&-sannes and J ourtia ti at, "ESTIM: Simulating
Estelle Description of OS1 Protocols." Proceedings of the
1989 Singapore International Conference on Networks, pp
144-149. July 1989.
Yao-xue Zhang. K Takahashi, N Shuatori, S Noguchi, "A
Knowledge-Based System for Protocol Synthesis (KSPS),"
IEEE J Selected Areas Commun., Vol. 6, No. 5 , June 1988.
Interational Organization for Standardization @SO).
Information processing systems - Open Systems
Interconnection -LOTOS - A formal description technique
based on the temporal ordering of observational behaviour.
1989 (E).
Q 1992 IEEE
 Singapore ICCSllSlTA '92

[131 A L Chapin. BBN Communications, Cambridge. [33] S C Murphy, P Gunningberg and J P J Kelly, "Experience
Massachusetts. "Computer Communication Standards," with Estelle, LOTOS and S D L a protocol implementation
ACM SIGCOMM, Computer Communication Review, Vol. experiment" Computer Network and ISDN System, Vol.
21, No.5,1991. 22.No. 1, August 1991.
1141 Jan de Meer, R Roth, S Vuong," Introduction to algebraic
specifications based on the language ACT ONE," Computer
Network and ISDN System, Vol. 23, No. 5. February 1992.
1151 S 0 Hallsteinsen, A Venstad. "Tranformational Program
development - An approach for translating SDL to CHILL,"
SDL'89 The language at work, October. 1989.
[16] R L Probert, 0 Monkewich, 'TTCN the international
notation for specifying tests of communications systems,"
Computer Network and ISDN System, Vol. 23. No. 5,
February 1992.
[17] S Vuong(S T Vuong), "Guest editorial." Computer Network
and ISDN System, Vol. 23, No. 5, February 1992
[U]G Smith. "A formal specification of signalling system No.7
Telephone user part," Proceedings of the 1989 Singapore
International Conference on Networks, pp 50-55, July
1989.
[19] A Lee, "Formal specification of intelligent network
services," Proceedings of the 1989 Singapore International
Conference on Networks, pp 421426, July 1989.

[ZO] B Meandzija, "Archetype.: A Unified Method for the Design

and Implementation of Protocol Architectures," IEEE
Trans. Software Eng., Vol. 14, No. 6, June 1988.
[21] Interational Organization for Standardization (ISO),
Information processing systems - Open Systems
Interconnection -Estelle: A formal description technique
based on an extended state transition model. 1989 (E).
[22] Interational Organization for Standardization (ISO).
Information processing systems - Open Systems
Interconnection -Basic Reference Model, 1984 (E).
[23] M A D Ayadi, "Experience in using Estelle for the formal
description of OS1 presentation service,'' Proceedings of the
1989 Singapore International Conference on Networks, pp
150-155, July 1989.
[a]W S Hsieh, C S Lu. C S Yang, Y M Tsai, "Improved check
points in Estelle," Proceedings of the 1989 Singapore
International Conference on Networks, pp 62-67, July
1989.
[2S] R Sijelmassi and R J L ~ M "Guidelines
, for using Estelle to
specify OS1 services and protocols," Computer Network
and ISDN System, Vol. 23, No. 5 , February 1992.
I261 A Olsen, "Guidelines for the SDL Formal Model," SDL87
state of the art and future trends, 1987.
[27] SDL'87 stateof the art and future trends, April, 1987.
[28] SDL'91 Evolving methods, October, 1991.
[29] P Gelli, "Evaluation and comparison of three specification
language: SDL. LOTOS and Estelle," SDL87 state of the
art and future trends, 1987.
1301 K Takahashi, N Shiratori and S Noguchi, "An Intelligent
Support System for Protocol and Communication Software
Dcvelopment," IEEE J. Selected Areas Commun.. Vol. 6,
No. 5, June 1988.
1311 G Neufeld and S Vuong, "An overview of ASN.l,"
Computer Network and ISDN System, Vol. 23, No. 5.
February 1992.
[32] K K Sy. M 0 Shiobara, M Yamaguchi, Y Kobayashi, S
Shukuyu, T Tomatsu. "OSI-SNA interconnections." IBM
Syst.J., Vol. 26,No. 2, pp 157-173. 1987.

192
0 1992 IEEE

Irrr