Periodic Reporting for period 2 - AB4Rail (Alternative Bearers for Rail)
Période du rapport: 2022-01-01 au 2022-12-31
Context of the project
The AB4Rail project focuses on the identification of the alternative wireless technologies (or alternative bearers) for communications in the railway sector (Workstream 1), on the study and assessment of communication protocols for railway applications (Workstream 2) and, finally on dissemination of results among stakeholders, industrial partners, and within programs of the railway world such as Shif2Rail and X2Rail-5. Then, the project is organized into two main workstreams with the following objectives as also identified in the GA.
Main objectives of AB4Rail are:
Workstream 1 (Alternative bearers)
• Obj. 1.1: To identify, assess, analyse and describe Alternative communication Bearers (ABs) for the rail environment, from a technology perspective;
• Obj. 1.2: To select the most promising AB technologies by providing a recommendation or classification of ABs in terms of technology and business case development;
• Obj. 1.3: To compare the expected communication characteristics of each AB with well-established wireless technologies of Traditional Bearers (TBs);
Workstream 2 (Communication protocols)
• Obj. 2.1: To identify the appropriate transport protocol for ensuring communication characteristics and capabilities during application development;
• Obj. 2.2: To study the interworking between Internet Protocol v4 (IPv4) and Internet Protocol v6 (IPv6);
• Obj. 2.3: To conduct IP-based emulation/simulation to support the protocol investigation activities.
• Obj. 2.4: To analyse options for transport layer and the application layer protocols for specific rail applications;
Moreover, it has a dedicated work package (WP4) with the following objectives:
• Obj. 3.1: prepare the dissemination and exploitation plan;
• Obj. 3.2: providing a continuous dissemination and diffusion of updated results achieved within the AB4Rail project, in the communities of industry, academic, end-users, Shift2Rail/railway parties.
Conclusions of the actions. All planned activities have been performed and the outcomes are reported in the deliverable of the project.
The AB4Rail project focuses on the identification of the alternative wireless technologies (or alternative bearers) for communications in the railway sector (Workstream 1), on the study and assessment of communication protocols for railway applications (Workstream 2) and, finally on dissemination of results among stakeholders, industrial partners, and within programs of the railway world such as Shif2Rail and X2Rail-5. Then, the project is organized into two main workstreams with the following objectives as also identified in the GA.
Main objectives of AB4Rail are:
Workstream 1 (Alternative bearers)
• Obj. 1.1: To identify, assess, analyse and describe Alternative communication Bearers (ABs) for the rail environment, from a technology perspective;
• Obj. 1.2: To select the most promising AB technologies by providing a recommendation or classification of ABs in terms of technology and business case development;
• Obj. 1.3: To compare the expected communication characteristics of each AB with well-established wireless technologies of Traditional Bearers (TBs);
Workstream 2 (Communication protocols)
• Obj. 2.1: To identify the appropriate transport protocol for ensuring communication characteristics and capabilities during application development;
• Obj. 2.2: To study the interworking between Internet Protocol v4 (IPv4) and Internet Protocol v6 (IPv6);
• Obj. 2.3: To conduct IP-based emulation/simulation to support the protocol investigation activities.
• Obj. 2.4: To analyse options for transport layer and the application layer protocols for specific rail applications;
Moreover, it has a dedicated work package (WP4) with the following objectives:
• Obj. 3.1: prepare the dissemination and exploitation plan;
• Obj. 3.2: providing a continuous dissemination and diffusion of updated results achieved within the AB4Rail project, in the communities of industry, academic, end-users, Shift2Rail/railway parties.
Conclusions of the actions. All planned activities have been performed and the outcomes are reported in the deliverable of the project.
Workstream 1 (WP2). Obj. 1.1 have been covered in D2.1. The deliverable provided an overview of the prior state-of-art in the areas of selected ABs, of interest for improving capabilities of the Adaptable Communication System (ACS). A set of candidate communication technologies are investigated as potential ones for railway applications. The methodology is based on the most important communication features not only from a technological perspective (i.e. standard, protocol, security, and performance) but also considering (but not limited to) other factors as maturity, ease of development and deployment costs, together with economic and business implications.
Obj. 1.2 and Obj. 1.3 have been covered in D2.2 and D2.3. Deliverable D2.2 assessed the selected AB, rejecting some technologies (e.g. short range IoT and those not mature) because they are not suitable for the scenarios and traffic service classes of ACS. The following technologies have been selected as eligible from this analysis: Free Space Optics (FSO), High-Altitude Platform System (HAPS) and Low-Earth Orbit satellites (LEO). In D2.3 the economic analysis and business plan for deployment have been presented for all three AB technologies that have passed the technical verification (in D2.2). Also, in D2.3. the performances offered by the selected AB technologies have been compared with those of the TBs. In addition, the integration of AB with TBs in the various railway scenarios (metro, regional, mainline) has been discussed.
The WP2 activities in the second period of the project started with the market scouting of technologies and devices for selected ABs. Due to the unavailability of devices, we considered a simulation-based approach. We have developed three simulation software tools. The results in D2.4 assess the applicability of FSO, LEO, and HAPS as ABs for ACS.
Workstream 2 (WP3). Obj. 2.1 has been covered in D3.1 by reviewing and identifying the appropriate transport and application protocols, while Obj. 2.2 has been covered in D3.2 studying and proposing some strategies for allowing the IPv4 and IPv6 interworking. Obj. 2.3 has been covered by the development of the emulator at IP level, thus providing the emulation/simulation support to investigate the transport and application protocols. The emulator development and related tests have been described within the D3.3.
Obj. 2.4 has been partially covered in task 3.4 (M9-M13). In particular, the corresponding deliverable D3.4 (M13) covers the analysis of the transport protocols for services such as constant bit rate, variable bit rate and file transfer. Cases on transport protocol coexistence is also considered. The rest of Obj. 2.4 (i.e. analysis related to the application protocols) will be covered in the next period.
The WP3 activities in the second period of the project have continued and concluded the activities of Obj. 2.4. In particular we started with the analysis of options for transport and application protocols planned in Task 3.6 concerning the analysis of secure versions of the transport and application layer protocols.
The analysis concerned the secure versions of the TCP with the novel QUIC protocol. The HTTP and FTP and their secure versions have been also analyzed. Protocol performances were assessed using the emulator developed in Task 3.3 (D3.3). We observed that the TCP BBR and QUIC protocols offer better performance and are resistant to packet loss. Finally, we analyzed the security aspects of the considered transport and application protocols. We observed that the robustness against the threats in Table 5 in D3.3 of the application protocols is related to the secure features of the underlying transport protocol. All results are reported in deliverable D3.5.
Obj. 1.2 and Obj. 1.3 have been covered in D2.2 and D2.3. Deliverable D2.2 assessed the selected AB, rejecting some technologies (e.g. short range IoT and those not mature) because they are not suitable for the scenarios and traffic service classes of ACS. The following technologies have been selected as eligible from this analysis: Free Space Optics (FSO), High-Altitude Platform System (HAPS) and Low-Earth Orbit satellites (LEO). In D2.3 the economic analysis and business plan for deployment have been presented for all three AB technologies that have passed the technical verification (in D2.2). Also, in D2.3. the performances offered by the selected AB technologies have been compared with those of the TBs. In addition, the integration of AB with TBs in the various railway scenarios (metro, regional, mainline) has been discussed.
The WP2 activities in the second period of the project started with the market scouting of technologies and devices for selected ABs. Due to the unavailability of devices, we considered a simulation-based approach. We have developed three simulation software tools. The results in D2.4 assess the applicability of FSO, LEO, and HAPS as ABs for ACS.
Workstream 2 (WP3). Obj. 2.1 has been covered in D3.1 by reviewing and identifying the appropriate transport and application protocols, while Obj. 2.2 has been covered in D3.2 studying and proposing some strategies for allowing the IPv4 and IPv6 interworking. Obj. 2.3 has been covered by the development of the emulator at IP level, thus providing the emulation/simulation support to investigate the transport and application protocols. The emulator development and related tests have been described within the D3.3.
Obj. 2.4 has been partially covered in task 3.4 (M9-M13). In particular, the corresponding deliverable D3.4 (M13) covers the analysis of the transport protocols for services such as constant bit rate, variable bit rate and file transfer. Cases on transport protocol coexistence is also considered. The rest of Obj. 2.4 (i.e. analysis related to the application protocols) will be covered in the next period.
The WP3 activities in the second period of the project have continued and concluded the activities of Obj. 2.4. In particular we started with the analysis of options for transport and application protocols planned in Task 3.6 concerning the analysis of secure versions of the transport and application layer protocols.
The analysis concerned the secure versions of the TCP with the novel QUIC protocol. The HTTP and FTP and their secure versions have been also analyzed. Protocol performances were assessed using the emulator developed in Task 3.3 (D3.3). We observed that the TCP BBR and QUIC protocols offer better performance and are resistant to packet loss. Finally, we analyzed the security aspects of the considered transport and application protocols. We observed that the robustness against the threats in Table 5 in D3.3 of the application protocols is related to the secure features of the underlying transport protocol. All results are reported in deliverable D3.5.
Assessment was carried out in terms of technical and economic aspects concerning the FSO, LEO, and HAPS communications, that were selected as the most promising ABs. Evaluation of transport protocols over IP networks for rail applications considering the specific characteristics of the railway scenarios. Considered transport protocols: TCP (CUBIC), TCP BBR, UDP, SCTP and also QUIC.
Expected results. Advancement of the technical analysis of the most promising ABs (FSO, LEO, and HAPS), with particular reference to the evaluation in realistic scenarios. Evaluation of the performance of the application protocols and transport protocols for railway communications also including the QUIC protocol.
Potential impacts:
- Impact on market aspects concerning the stakeholders dealing with communication technologies for the railway which can now include traditional bearers (4G,5G, WiFi, GEO satellite) and now the ABs in the list of potential technologies to be used in the railway sector;
- related to the improvement of Internet connectivity services offered to passengers thanks to the high transmission capacities made available by the selected ABs technologies;
- Inclusion of possible new stakeholders (companies, research institutions,) involved in ABs development and for which the railway sector can become a potential market;
- Impact on the development of the protocol stack for communications and ACS, oriented to the appropriate choice of application and transport protocols in accordance with the application class.
Expected results. Advancement of the technical analysis of the most promising ABs (FSO, LEO, and HAPS), with particular reference to the evaluation in realistic scenarios. Evaluation of the performance of the application protocols and transport protocols for railway communications also including the QUIC protocol.
Potential impacts:
- Impact on market aspects concerning the stakeholders dealing with communication technologies for the railway which can now include traditional bearers (4G,5G, WiFi, GEO satellite) and now the ABs in the list of potential technologies to be used in the railway sector;
- related to the improvement of Internet connectivity services offered to passengers thanks to the high transmission capacities made available by the selected ABs technologies;
- Inclusion of possible new stakeholders (companies, research institutions,) involved in ABs development and for which the railway sector can become a potential market;
- Impact on the development of the protocol stack for communications and ACS, oriented to the appropriate choice of application and transport protocols in accordance with the application class.