Collaborative Construction of Telecommunications Services. An Enterprise Architecture and Model Driven Engineering Method

969 views

Published on

Ph.D. defense, 2012.01

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
4 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
969
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Collaborative Construction of Telecommunications Services. An Enterprise Architecture and Model Driven Engineering Method

  1. 1. Collaborative Construction of Telecommunications Services. An Enterprise Architecture and Model Driven Engineering Method Vanea Chiprianov Supervisors: Yvon KermarrecWork Siegfried Rouvrais Ph.D. defense 16 January 2012Affiliation Teaching assistantScholarship
  2. 2. Agenda  Challenges in telecom service life-cycle  How to reduce telecom service construction time ?  State of the art: Advantages and limitations  Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction  Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service  Conclusion and perspectivespage 2/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  3. 3. Context: Telecom service The offering of telecommunications for a fee directly to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used. [Federal Communications Commission, 1996]  Broad definition: • Any content of telecommunications - e.g. voice, video • Several types of facilities - e.g. circuit or packet switched network  Examples: • Multimedia conferencing service, phone call, et al.page 3/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  4. 4. Context: Telecom service stakeholderspage 4/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  5. 5. Context: Telecom service stakeholders Stakeholders cf. [Haalstrand, 1994]page 4/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  6. 6. Context: Telecom service stakeholders Stakeholders cf. [Haalstrand, 1994]page 4/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  7. 7. Context: Telecom service stakeholders Stakeholders cf. [Haalstrand, 1994]page 4/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  8. 8. Context: Telecomservice life-cycle time [Berndt, 1994] page 5/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  9. 9. Context: Our focuson telecom servicelife-cycle timepage 5/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  10. 10. Context: Main challenges in telecom service life-cycle  Convergence of the traditional circuit-switched networks with the packet-switched ones • Services as software  Increased involvement of the End User in the telecom service life-cycle  Market deregulation • Increased competition  Concept-to-market time, quality of service, cost, et al.page 6/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  11. 11. Agenda Challenges in telecom service life-cycle How to reduce telecom service construction time ? State of the art: Advantages and limitations Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service Conclusion and perspectives Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  12. 12. Research question  How to reduce telecommunications service construction time while affecting non-negatively other parameters (e.g. Cost, QoS, QoE) ? RQ 1 Construction process RQ 2 Software tools RQ 3 Tool building processpage 7/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  13. 13. Agenda Challenges in telecom service life-cycle How to reduce telecom service construction time ? State of the art: Advantages and limitations Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service Conclusion and perspectives Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  14. 14. State of the art Obs.: existing literature focuses on software tools. Requirements of Service Providers and Developers for Service Creation Environment (SCE): • Req 1: An overall model • Req 6: Integration ● Req 2: Domain specificity • Req 7: Reuse ● Req 3: Rapid prototyping • Req 8: Wide range of ● Req 4: Collaborative services support • Req 9: Easy evolution of ● Req 5: Early services verification/simulation [Blum, 2009], [Haalstrand, 1994], [Khlifi, 2008], [Kosmas, 1997], [Yelmo, 2008]page 8/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  15. 15. State of the art: Service Creation Environments categories For Next  Cat Session InitiationGeneration 1: SIP-dependent Protocol (SIP)Network (NGN)  Cat 2: SIP- independent [Rosenberg, 2002](circuit-switchednetworks)  Cat 3: NGN composition For Web  Cat 4: Parlay X Parlay X - [ETSI, 2006](packet-switchednetworks)  Cat 5: Web mash-up  Cat 6: Hybrid page 9/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  16. 16. State of the art: Comparison of SCEspage 10/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  17. 17. State of the art: Comparison of SCEspage 10/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  18. 18. State of the art: Comparison of SCEspage 10/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  19. 19. State of the art: Comparison of SCEsadvantages of Web approaches bad -- - 0 + ++ good page 10/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  20. 20. State of the art: Comparison of SCEsadvantage of NGN approaches bad -- - 0 + ++ good page 10/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  21. 21. State of the art: Major limitations  No category of SCE addresses Req 1: An overall model  Choice between either: • Req 2: Domain specificity XOR • Req 3 : Rapid prototyping, Req 7: Reuse, Req 8: Wide range and Req 9: Easy evolutionpage 11/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  22. 22. State of the art: Major limitations  No category of SCE addresses Req 1: An overall model Enterprise Architecture (EA)  Choice between either: • Req 2: Domain specificity XOR • Req 3 : Rapid prototyping, Req 7: Reuse, Req 8: Wide range and Req 9: Easy evolutionpage 11/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  23. 23. State of the art: Major limitations  No category of SCE addresses Req 1: An overall model Enterprise Architecture (EA)  Choice between either: • Req 2: Domain specificity XOR AND • Req 3 : Rapid prototyping, Req 7: Reuse, Req 8: Wide range and Req 9: Easy evolution Model Driven Engineering (MDE)page 11/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  24. 24. Enterprise Architecture A coherent whole of principles, methods and models that are used in the design and realization of the enterprises organizational structure, business processes, information systems and infrastructure. [Jonkers, 2006] • Enterprise Architecture frameworks (e.g. TOGAF) • Enterprise Architecture Modeling Languages (EAMLs) (e.g. ArchiMate)page 12/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  25. 25. Contributions of EA towards fulfilling SCE requirements Req 1: Overall model  Unified View Req 6: Integration  ArchiMate inter-layer relations Req 7: Reuse  Layered architecture Req 8: Wide range  Separation from the platform  TOGAf addresses the Req 9: Easy evolution evolution of EAspage 13/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  26. 26. Model Driven Engineering (MDE) A software development method which focuses on creating and exploiting domain models to simulate, estimate, understand, communicate and produce code. [Gherbi, 2009] • The Meta-modeling approach for language definition • Model Transformations (model to model, code generation) • Meta-toolspage 14/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  27. 27. Contributions of MDE towards fulfilling SCE requirements Req 2: Domain  Meta-models specificity Req 3: Rapid  High automation prototyping Req 5: Early  Leveraging domain- verification specific tools Req 6: Integration  Model Transformations Req 7: Reuse  Capture by meta- models Req 8: Wide range  Platform independence Req 9: Easy evolution  High automationpage 15/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  28. 28. Agenda  Challenges in telecom service life-cycle  How to reduce telecom service construction time ?  State of the art: Advantages and limitations  Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction  Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service  Conclusion and perspectivespage 16/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  29. 29. Solution: Telecom service construction process  Responsibilities of a modeler [Kruchten, 2008] Modeler = system/software architect/designer 1.Model 2.Test 3.Collaborate 4.Interoperatepage 17/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  30. 30. Solution: Telecomservice constructionprocess 1.Model 2.Test 3.Collaborate 4.Interoperatepage 18/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  31. 31. Solution: Telecomservice constructionprocesspage 19/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  32. 32. Agenda Challenges in telecom service life-cycle How to reduce telecom service construction time ? State of the art: Advantages and limitations Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service Conclusion and perspectives Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  33. 33. Solution: Tool building process 1.Model 2. 3. 4.page 20/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  34. 34. Solution: Toolbuilding process page 21/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  35. 35. Solution: Tool building process 1. 2.Test 3. 4.page 22/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  36. 36. Solution:Tool buildingprocesspage 23/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  37. 37. Solution: Tool building process 1. 2. 3.Collaborate 4.page 24/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  38. 38. Solution:Tool buildingprocesspage 25/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  39. 39. Solution: Tool building process 1. 2. 3. 4.Interoperatepage 26/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  40. 40. Solution:Tool buildingprocess page 27/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  41. 41. Agenda Challenges in telecom service life-cycle How to reduce telecom service construction time ? State of the art: Advantages and limitations Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service Conclusion and perspectives Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  42. 42. Solution: Software tools 1.Model 2. 3. 4. page 28/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  43. 43. Solution: Modeling with DSMLsDomain Specific ModelingLanguage (DSML) = graphicallanguage that offers 1.Model 2.● expressive power focused 3.on a particular domain,● to visualize, specify, 4.construct and document theartifacts of a software-intensive system.[Booch, 2005], [Deursen,2000]page 29/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  44. 44. Solution:Modelingwith DSMLsTelecom Archi (GPLType licence)extension[http://archi.cetis.ac.uk/] page 30/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  45. 45. Solution: Modeling with DSMLs  Meta-models: 46 concepts  Code generation semantics: IyassAlloush, masters interhship, 6months, 39.8 KB  Graphical editor : 395.8 KBpage 31/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  46. 46. Solution: Software tools 1. 2.Test 3. 4. page 32/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  47. 47. Solution: Testingthrough leverage of COTSComponents Off The Shelf(COTS) = a commercially 1.available or open source 2.Testpiece of software that othersoftware projects can reuse 3.and integrate into their own 4.products[Torchiano, 2004]page 33/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  48. 48. Solution: Leveraging the COTS – Transform to MM testing Excerpt of Xpand template for OPNET input model generationExcerpt from the model of a Xpandconferencing service at the Telecom (OpenArchitectureWare) The static configuration ofArchiMate Technology layer the conferencing service [Efftinge, 2006] excerpt model for OPNET page 34/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  49. 49. Solution: Leveraging the COTS – Transform to MM testing Excerpt of Xpand template for OPNET input model generation Excerpt from the model of a Xpand conferencing service at the Telecom (OpenArchitectureWare) The static configuration of ArchiMate Technology layer [Efftinge, 2006] the conferencing service excerpt model for OPNET  Codegeneration Model Transformation: Iyass Alloush, masters internship, 6 months, 122.4 KBpage 35/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  50. 50. Solution: Software tools 1. 2. 3.Collaborate 4. page 36/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  51. 51. Solution: Collaborating bycapturing and retrievingDecision Rationale 1.Decision Rationale DSML 2. 3.CollaborateDecision Rationale = 4.the justification behinddecisions, the reasoningthat goes intodetermining the design ofthe artifact.[Dutoit, 2006]page 37/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  52. 52. Solution: Defining a Decision Rationale DSML  Meta-model: 6 concepts  Graphical editor : Adil Meribaa and Mosbah Lassoued, masters internships, 2 weeks, 108.8 KBpage 38/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  53. 53. Solution: Software tools 1. 2. 3. 4.Interoperate page 39/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  54. 54. However, in the particular case of ArchiMate The ArchiMate Business-Application alignment, from [OpenGroup, 2009] The ArchiMate Application- Technology alignment, from [OpenGroup, 2009]page 40/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  55. 55. Agend Challenges in telecom service life-cycle How to reduce telecom service construction time ? State of the art: Advantages and limitations Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service Conclusion and perspectives Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  56. 56. Case study: Modeling 1.Model 2. 3. 4. A multimedia conferencing servicepage 41/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  57. 57. Case study: Modeling with DSMLs a multimedia conferencing serviceThe model of a conferencingService at the TelecomArchiMate Business layerpage 42/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  58. 58. Case study: Modeling with DSMLs a multimedia conferencing service The model of a conferencing service at the Telecom ArchiMate Application layerpage 43/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  59. 59. Case study: Modeling with DSMLs a multimedia conferencing service The model of a conferencing service at the Telecom ArchiMate Technology layerpage 44/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  60. 60. Case study: Testing 1. 2.Test 3. 4.page 45/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  61. 61. Case study: Testing through leverage of COTS a multimedia conferencing service OPNET=network simulator http://www.opnet.comOPNET simulation results for anIMS node of the conferencing service The static configuration of the conferencing service excerpt model for OPNETpage 46/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  62. 62. Case study: Collaborating 1. 2. 3.Collaborate 4.page 47/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  63. 63. Case study: Collaborating by capturing Decision Rationale with a DR DSML on a multimedia conferencing service Example of Collaboration Design Rationale ArchiMate extension used with a conferencing service example developed at the Application layer of the Telecommunications ArchiMate extension.page 48/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  64. 64. Agenda Challenges in telecom service life-cycle How to reduce telecom service construction time ? State of the art: Advantages and limitations Solution/Contribution: 1.Telecom service construction process 2.Tool building process 3.Software tools for telecom service construction Complete case study on a multimedia conferencing service Conclusion and perspectives Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  65. 65. Solution: Meeting the SCE requirementspage 49/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  66. 66. State of the art: Major limitations  No category of SCE addresses Req 1: An overall model  Choice between either: • Req 2: Domain specificity XOR • Req 3 : Rapid prototyping, Req 7: Reuse, Req 8: Wide range and Req 9: Easy evolutionpage 50/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  67. 67. Solution/Contribution: Overcoming major limitations of the state of the art  No category of SCE addresses Req 1: An overall model Extending EAMLs (ArchiMate)  Choice between either: • Req 2: Domain specificity XOR AND DSMLs • Req 3 : Rapid prototyping, Req 7: Reuse, Req 8: Wide range and Req 9: Easy evolution Models, code generation, MTs, HOTs, etcpage 51/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  68. 68. Solution/Contribution: advantages  Provides a method Method = - a set of modeling conventions (Modeling Language - ML) - a process: - provides guidance as to the order of the activities, - specifies what artifacts should be developed using the ML. [Ramsin, 2008]  Reflects current practices in industry (more easily) accepted by practitioners  Relies on models and offers high automation degree more rapid software tool building  Contributes towards fulfilling all Service Providers and Developers requirementspage 52/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  69. 69. Solution/Contribution to the research question  How to reduce telecommunications service construction time while affecting non-negatively other parameters (e.g. Cost, QoS, QoE) ?RQ 1 Construction process RQ 2 Software tools RQ 3 Tool building process O EM D page 53/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  70. 70. Solution/Contribution: limitations •The waterfall-like construction process is not flexible. • Testing/simulation results have to be integrated manually into models.•The SCE and •Viewpointconstruction process interoperabilityneed testing by depends heavily onService Providers common entitiesand Developerspage 54/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  71. 71. Solution/Contribution: perspectives •Introduce more flexibility (e.g., iterative, agile) in the construction process. •(Semi-)automatic integrating of testing/simulation results into models.•Construct TelecomDSML MMs from e.g.Frameworx•Define alignment •Implement the interoperabilitymeasures to ensure processviewpointinteroperability (e.g.[Simonin, 2011])page 55/55 Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  72. 72. Personal publications1.Chiprianov V., Kermarrec Y., Rouvrais S.: Integrating DSLs into a Software Engineering Process: Application to CollaborativeConstruction of Telecom Services. Ed. M. Mernik, Formal and Practical Aspects of Domain-Specific Languages: RecentDevelopments, IGI Global, 2012 (submitted).2.Chiprianov V., Kermarrec Y., Rouvrais S., Simonin J.: Extending Enterprise Architecture Modeling Languages for Collaboration.Application to Telecommunications Service Design. Software and Systems Modeling, 2012 (submitted).3.Chiprianov V., Kermarrec Y., Rouvrais S.: Extending Enterprise Architecture Modelling Languages: Application toTelecommunications Service Creation. The 9th Enterprise Engineering track at the 27 th Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC),Trento, Italy, 6pp, accepted, (2011) – rank B [ERA].4.Chiprianov V., Alloush I., Kermarrec Y., Rouvrais S.: Telecommunications Service Creation: Towards Extensions for EnterpriseArchitecture Modeling Languages. In: Proc. of the 6th Intl Conf. on Software and Data Technologies (ICSOFT), Seville, Spain, vol 1,pp. 23-29, (2011) - rank B [ERA].5.Chiprianov V., Kermarrec Y., Rouvrais S.: Towards semantic interoperability of graphical domain specific modeling languages fortelecommunications service design. In: Proc. of the 2nd Intl Conf. on Models and Ontology-based Design of Protocols, Architecturesand Services (MOPAS), Budapest, Hungary, pp.21-24, (2011).6.Chiprianov, V., Kermarrec, Y. and Alff, P.: A Model-Driven Approach for Telecommunications Network Services Definition. In:Proceedings of the 15th Open European Summer School and IFIP TC6. 6 WS on The Internet of the Future, LNCS, pages 199–207,Barcelona, Spain, (2009).7.Rouvrais S., Chiprianov V.: Modeling and Architecting Educational Frameworks. In: Electronic Proc. of the 7th Intl CDIO Conf.,Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen (2011).8.Chiprianov, V., Kermarrec, Y., Rouvrais, S.: Meta-tools for Software Language Engineering: A Flexible Collaborative ModelingLanguage for Efficient Telecommunications Service Design. In: FlexiTools WS, 32nd ACM/IEEE Intl. Conf. on Soft. Engineering(ICSE), Cape Town, South Africa, 5 pp, (2010).9.Chiprianov, V., Kermarrec, Y.: An Approach for Constructing a Domain Definition Metamodel with ATL. In: Model Transformationwith ATL, 1st Intl. WS,Nantes,France, pp 18-33, (2009).10.Chiprianov V., Kermarec Y., Rouvrais S.: Practical Model Extension for Modeling Language Profiles. An Enterprise ArchitectureModeling Language Extension for Telecommunications Service Creation. 7émes Journées sur l’Ingénierie Dirigée par les Modèles,Lille, France, pp. 85-91, 2011.11.Chiprianov, V., Kermarrec, Y.: Model-based DSL Frameworks: A Simple Graphical Telecommunications Specific ModelingLanguage. In: 5émes Journées sur l’Ingénierie Dirigée par les Modèles, Nancy, France, pages 179–186, (2009). Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  73. 73. Presentation bibliography [Bernardi, 2011] S. Bernardi, J. Merseguer & D. Petriu. A dependability profile within MARTE. Software and Systems Modeling, vol. 10, pp. 313–336, 2011. [Bertin, 2009] E. Bertin. Architecture of communication services in a convergence context (in French). PhD thesis, National Institut of Telecommunications and Pierre and Marie Curie University - Paris 6, 2009 [Booch, 2005] G. Booch, J. Rumbaugh & I. Jacobson. Unified Modeling Language User Guide, The Addison- Wesley Object Technology Series. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, USA, 2005. [Blum, 2009] N. Blum, T. Magedanz, F. Schreiner & S. Wahle. From IMS Management to SOA Based NGN Management. J. Netw. Syst. Manage., vol. 17, pp. 33–52, 2009. [Deursen, 2000] A. Deursen, P. Klint & J. Visser. Domain-specific languages: an annotated bibliography. SIGPLAN Not., vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 26–36, 2000. [Dutoit, 2006] A.H. Dutoit, R. McCall, I. Mistrík & B. Paech. Rationale management in software engineering: Concepts and techniques. Rationale Management in Software Engineering, pp. 1–48, 2006. [Efftinge, 2006] S. Efftinge & C. Kadura. OpenArchitectureWare 4.1 Xpand Language Reference. Technical report, OpenArchitectureWare, 2006. [ETSI, 2006] ETSI. Standard ES 202 391-1, Open Service Access (OSA); Parlay X Web Services; Part 1: Common (Parlay X 2), version 1.2.1, 2006. [FCC, 1996] FCC. Telecommunications Act of 1996. 1996. [Gherbi, 2009] T. Gherbi, D. Meslati & I. Borne. MDE between Promises and Challenges. In 11th Intl. Conf. on Computer Modelling and Simulation (UKSIM), pp. 152 –155, 2009. [Hallstrand, 1994] J. Hållstrand & D. Martin. Industrial Requirements on a Service Creation Environment. In Proc. of the 2nd Intl. Conf. on Intelligence in Broadband Services and Networks: Towards a Pan-European Telecom-munication Service Infrastructure, pp. 17–25, London, UK, 1994. Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services
  74. 74. Presentation bibliography [Jonkers, 2006] H. Jonkers, M. Lankhorst, H.Doest, F. Arbab, H. Bosma & R. Wieringa. Enterprise architecture: Management tool and blueprint for the organisation. Information Systems Frontiers, vol. 8, pp. 63–66, 2006 [Khlifi, 2008] H. Khlifi & J.-C. Gregoire. IMS Application Servers: Roles, Requirements, and Implementation Technologies. Internet Computing, IEEE, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 40 –51, 2008. [Kosmas, 1997] N. Kosmas & K. J. Turner. Requirements for Service Creation Environments. In 2nd Intl Ws on Applied Formal Methods in System Design, p. 133 - 137, 1997. [OpenGroup, 2009] The Open Group. ArchiMate 1.0 Specification, 2009. [Ramsin, 2008] R. Ramsin & R. F. Paige. Process-centered review of object oriented software development methodologies. ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 40, pp. 3:1–3:89, 2008. [Rosenberg, 2002] J. Rosenberg, H. Schulzrinne, G. Camarillo, A. Johnston, J. Peterson, R. Sparks, M. Handley & E. Schooler. SIP: session initiation protocol. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF): RFC 3261, 2002. [Simonin, 2011] J. Simonin, E. Bertin, Y. Le Traon, J.-M. Jezequel & N. Crespi. Analysis and improvement of the alignment between business and information system for telecom services. International Journal On Advances in Software, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 117–128, 2011. [Torchiano, 2004] Marco Torchiano & Maurizio Morisio. Overlooked Aspects of COTS-Based Development. IEEE Softw., vol. 21, pages 88–93, 2004. [Yelmo, 2008] J. C. Yelmo, J. M. del Alamo, R. Trapero, P. Falcarin, J. Yu, B. Carro, C. Baladron. A user- centric service creation approach for next generation networks. Proceedings of the First ITU-T Kaleidoscope Academic Conference Innovations in NGN: Future Network and Services, 2008. Chiprianov Ph.D. defense Collaborative construction of telecommunications services

×