ETSI ETS 300 403-7 ed.1 (1998-04)

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-januar-1999
'LJLWDOQRRPUHåMH]LQWHJULUDQLPLVWRULWYDPL,6'13URWRNROGLJLWDOQHQDURþQLãNH
VLJQDOL]DFLMHãW'666LJQDOL]DFLMVNDRPUHåQDSODVW]DNUPLOMHQMHYRGRYQHJD
RVQRYQHJDNOLFDGHO$EVWUDNWQLSUHVNXãDOQLQL]$76LQGHOQDGRGDWQD
LQIRUPDFLMD]DSUHVNXãDQMHL]YHGEHSURWRNROD3,;,73URIRUPDVSHFLILNDFLMH]D
RPUHåMH
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one
(DSS1) protocol; Signalling network layer for circuit-mode basic call control; Part 7:
Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for
Testing (PIXIT) proforma specification for the network
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: ETS 300 403-7 Edition 1
ICS:
33.080 Digitalno omrežje z Integrated Services Digital
integriranimi storitvami Network (ISDN)
(ISDN)
35.100.30 Omrežni sloj Network layer
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

EUROPEAN ETS 300 403-7
TELECOMMUNICATION April 1998
STANDARD
Source: SPS Reference: DE/SPS-05094
ICS: 33.020
Key words: ISDN, DSS1, layer 3, testing, ATS, PIXIT, network
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN);
Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol;
Signalling network layer for circuit-mode basic call control;
Part 7: Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol
Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT) proforma
specification for the network
ETSI
European Telecommunications Standards Institute
ETSI Secretariat
Postal address: F-06921 Sophia Antipolis CEDEX - FRANCE
Office address: 650 Route des Lucioles - Sophia Antipolis - Valbonne - FRANCE
Internet: secretariat@etsi.fr - http://www.etsi.fr - http://www.etsi.org
Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 - Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16
Copyright Notification: No part may be reproduced except as authorized by written permission. The copyright and the
foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.
© European Telecommunications Standards Institute 1998. All rights reserved.

Page 2
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
Whilst every care has been taken in the preparation and publication of this document, errors in content,
typographical or otherwise, may occur. If you have comments concerning its accuracy, please write to
"ETSI Editing and Committee Support Dept." at the address shown on the title page.

Page 3
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
Contents
Foreword .5
1 Scope .7
2 Normative references.7
3 Definitions and abbreviations .8
3.1 Definitions .8
3.2 Abbreviations .8
4 Abstract Test Method (ATM).9
4.1 Description of ATM used .9
4.2 Conventions for test components and PCOs.9
4.3 Conventions for point-to-multipoint configurations.11
5 Untestable test purposes.11
6 ATS conventions .12
6.1 Declarations part.12
6.1.1 Type definitions .12
6.1.1.1 Simple type definitions.12
6.1.1.2 Structured type definitions .12
6.1.1.2.1 TTCN structured type definitions .12
6.1.1.2.2 ASN.1 structured type definitions.12
6.1.1.3 ASP type definitions.12
6.1.1.3.1 TTCN ASP type definitions .12
6.1.1.3.2 ASN.1 ASP type definitions .13
6.1.1.4 PDU type definitions .13
6.1.1.4.1 TTCN PDU type definitions.13
6.1.1.4.2 ASN.1 PDU type definitions .13
6.1.2 Test suite constants .13
6.1.3 Test suite parameters .13
6.1.4 Variables .13
6.1.4.1 Test suite variables.13
6.1.4.2 Test case variables.13
6.1.5 Test suite operation definitions.13
6.2 Constraints part.14
6.2.1 Structured type constraint declaration.14
6.2.2 ASN.1 type constraint declaration .14
6.2.3 ASP type constraint declaration .14
6.2.3.1 ASN.1 ASP type constraint declaration .14
6.2.3.2 TTCN ASP type constraint declaration.14
6.2.4 PDU type constraint declaration.15
6.2.4.1 ASN.1 PDU type constraint declaration.15
6.2.4.2 TTCN PDU type constraint declaration .15
6.2.5 Derived constraints.15
6.2.6 Parameterized constraints.15
6.2.7 Value assignment.15
6.2.7.1 Specific values.15
6.2.7.2 Matching values.15
6.3 Dynamic part.15
6.3.1 Test cases.15
6.3.2 Test steps.15
6.3.3 Defaults .15
7 ATS to TP map.15

Page 4
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
8 PCTR conformance. 16
9 PIXIT conformance. 16
10 ATS conformance. 16
Annex A (normative): Protocol Conformance Test Report (PCTR) proforma . 17
A.1 Identification summary. 17
A.1.1 Protocol conformance test report. 17
A.1.2 IUT identification. 17
A.1.3 Testing environment. 17
A.1.4 Limits and reservations . 18
A.1.5 Comments. 18
A.2 IUT conformance status . 18
A.3 Static conformance summary. 18
A.4 Dynamic conformance summary. 18
A.5 Static conformance review report . 19
A.6 Test campaign report. 19
A.7 Observations. 36
Annex B (normative): Partial PIXIT proforma . 37
B.1 Identification summary. 37
B.2 Abstract test suite summary . 37
B.3 Test laboratory. 37
B.4 Client (of the test laboratory) . 38
B.5 System Under Test (SUT) . 38
B.6 Protocol information. 39
B.6.1 Protocol identification . 39
B.6.2 Configuration to be tested .39
B.6.3 Configuration options . 39
B.6.4 Test management timers . 40
B.6.5 Sending of messages by IUT . 41
B.6.6 Parameter values . 41
Annex C (normative): Abstract Test Suite (ATS). 44
C.1 The TTCN Graphical form (TTCN.GR) .44
C.2 The TTCN Machine Processable form (TTCN.MP) . 44
Annex D (informative): General structure of ATS. 45
History. 46

Page 5
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
Foreword
This European Telecommunication Standard (ETS) has been produced by the Signalling Protocols and
Switching (SPS) Technical Committee of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI).
This ETS is part 7 of a multi-part standard covering the Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one
(DSS1) protocol specification for the Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) signalling network layer
for circuit-mode basic call control, as described below:
Part 1: "Protocol specification [ITU-T Recommendation Q.931 (1993), modified]";
Part 2: "Specification and Description Language (SDL) diagrams";
Part 3: "Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement (PICS) proforma specification";
Part 4: "Test Suite Structure and Test Purposes (TSS&TP) specification for the user";
Part 5: "Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing
(PIXIT) proforma specification for the user";
Part 6: "TSS&TP specification for the network";
Part 7: "ATS and partial PIXIT proforma specification for the network".
Transposition dates
Date of adoption of this ETS: 20 March 1998
Date of latest announcement of this ETS (doa): 31 July 1998
Date of latest publication of new National Standard
or endorsement of this ETS (dop/e): 31 January 1999
Date of withdrawal of any conflicting National Standard (dow): 31 January 1999

Page 6
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
Blank page
Page 7
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
1 Scope
This seventh part of ETS 300 403 specifies the Abstract Test Suite (ATS) and partial Protocol
Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT) proforma for the Network side of the T reference
point or coincident S and T reference point (as defined in ITU-T Recommendation I.411 [10]) of
implementations conforming to the standards for the signalling network layer for circuit-mode basic call
control of the Digital Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol for the pan-European
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN), ETS 300 403-1 [1] and ETS 300 403-2 [2].
ETS 300 403-6 [4] specifies the Test Suite Structure and Test Purposes (TSS&TP) related to this ATS
and partial PIXIT proforma specification. Other parts specify the TSS&TP and the ATS and partial PIXIT
proforma for the User side of the T reference point or coincident S and T reference point of
implementations conforming to ETS 300 403-1 [1] and ETS 300 403-2 [2].
2 Normative references
This ETS incorporates by dated and undated reference, provisions from other publications. These
normative references are cited at the appropriate places in the text and the publications are listed
hereafter. For dated references, subsequent amendments to or revisions of any of these publications
apply to this ETS only when incorporated in it by amendment or revision. For undated references the latest
edition of the publication referred to applies.
[1] ETS 300 403-1 (1995): "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Digital
Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Signalling network layer
for circuit-mode basic call control; Part 1: Protocol specification [ITU-T
Recommendation Q.931 (1993), modified]".
[2] ETS 300 403-2 (1995): "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Digital
Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Signalling network layer
for circuit-mode basic call control; Part 2: Specification and Description
Language (SDL) diagrams".
[3] ETS 300 403-3 (1996): "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Digital
Subscriber Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Signalling network layer
for circuit-mode basic call control; Part 3: Protocol Implementation Conformance
Statement (PICS) proforma specification".
[4] ETS 300 403-6: "Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN); Digital Subscriber
Signalling System No. one (DSS1) protocol; Signalling network layer for circuit-
mode basic call control; Part 6: Test Suite Structure and Test Purposes
(TSS&TP) specification for the network".
[5] ISO/IEC 9646-1: "Information technology - OSI Conformance Testing
Methodology and Framework; Part 1: General Concepts".
[6] ISO/IEC 9646-2: "Information technology - OSI Conformance Testing
Methodology and Framework; Part 2: Abstract Test Suite Specification".
[7] ISO/IEC 9646-3: "Information technology - OSI Conformance Testing
Methodology and Framework; Part 3: The Tree and Tabular Combined
Notation".
Page 8
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
[8] ISO/IEC 9646-4: "Information technology - OSI Conformance Testing
Methodology and Framework; Part 4: Test realization".
[9] ISO/IEC 9646-5: "Information technology - OSI Conformance Testing
Methodology and Framework; Part 5: Requirements on test laboratories and
clients for the conformance assessment process".
[10] ITU-T Recommendation I.411 (1993): "ISDN user-network interfaces -
Reference configurations".
3 Definitions and abbreviations
3.1 Definitions
For the purposes of this ETS, the following definitions apply:
Abstract Test Suite (ATS): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
Implementation Under Test (IUT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
Lower Tester (LT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
Point of Control and Observation (PCO): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement (PICS): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
PICS proforma: See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing (PIXIT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
PIXIT proforma: See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
System Under Test (SUT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
Upper Tester (UT): See ISO/IEC 9646-1 [5].
3.2 Abbreviations
For the purposes of this ETS, the following abbreviations apply:
ASP Abstract Service Primitive
ATM Abstract Test Method
ATS Abstract Test Suite
BA Basic Access
CES Connection Endpoint Suffix
CM Co-ordination Message
CP Co-ordination Point
ExTS Executable Test Suite
IUT Implementation Under Test
LT Lower Tester
MOT Means Of Testing
MTC Main Test Component
PCO Point of Control and Observation
PCTR Protocol Conformance Test Report
PDU Protocol Data Unit
PICS Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement
PIXIT Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing
PRA Primary Rate Access
PTC Parallel Test Component
Page 9
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
SUT System Under Test
TCP Test Co-ordination Procedures
TP Test Purpose
TTCN Tree and Tabular Combined Notation
UT Upper Tester
4 Abstract Test Method (ATM)
4.1 Description of ATM used
The requirement for testing the network IUT is to focus on the behaviour of the network IUT at the user-
network interface where a T reference point or coincident S and T reference point applies. Thus the IUT is
the network DSS1 protocol entity at a particular user-network interface and is not the whole network.
It is possible to specify an ATS based on a Single party (remote) test method for such an IUT. However, it
is considered that an ATS based on such an approach is of limited use as the only way to specify IUT
generated PDUs is to use the "implicit send" statement. Many users of such an ATS would replace the
"implicit send" statements with descriptions of the behaviour at other interfaces.
An ATS based on a multi-party test method is considered to be more useful in that it is closer to how a
real test suite would be constructed. Such a test method specifies behaviour at multiple network
interfaces. One very important limitation here is that tests are focused on one particular interface. Thus
the test system is made up one Main Test Component (MTC) and one or more Parallel Test Components
(PTC), see figure 1.
4.2 Conventions for test components and PCOs
Master part Slave part
MTCA PTC2
CPA2
PTC1
CPA1
L0 PCO L1 PCO L2 PCO
IUT
NETWORK
Figure 1: Multi-party test method

Page 10
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
In a master/slave arrangement, the MTC is considered to be the master while the PTCs are the slaves.
The "slave" testers are only an explicit description of how to deal with the "other" interfaces during the
testing process, i.e. "how to make the IUT send the required message".
This means, in particular, that the verdict will only be assigned from the protocol aspects observed on the
interface under test (i.e. by the "master" tester), as it would be observed by a terminal connected to this
interface. A failure in the correlation between the protocol at the different interfaces to which the different
testers are connected, i.e. in the mechanism of the functional service itself, will not cause a FAIL verdict.
For instance, if the IUT fails to send a message on the tested interface after another interface has
received the proper stimulus, the verdict will be INCONCLUSIVE.
The MTC MTCA has two functions in this configuration. Firstly, it has the MTC function of controlling the
one or more PTCs. Thus it is responsible for starting the PTCs and afterwards co-ordinates activities by
exchanging Co-ordination Messages (CM) with the PTCs. Secondly it is responsible for the behaviour of
the Lower Tester (LT) at PCO L0.
A combination of the remote and multi-party test methods is applied. As can be seen from figure 1,
several PCOs are used. All PCOs reside at the service access points between layers 2 and 3.
MTC SUT PTC1,2
Layer 3 IUT Layer 3
 L0      L1,2 
Layer 2 Layer 2
 
        
Layer 1 Layer 1
Service provider
Figure 2: Combination of the remote and multi-party test methods
The MTC PCO is named "L0" ("L" for Lower). The L0 PCO is used to control and observe the behaviour of
the IUT and test case verdicts are assigned depending on the behaviour observed at this PCO. The PTCs
PTC1, PTC2 etc. use PCOs L1, L2 etc. These PCOs are used to control and, in a limited way, observe
the behaviour of the network equipment at interfaces other than the one under test. No verdicts are
assigned at these PCOs.
As stated in a previous paragraph, the non-receipt of network generated messages at L0, which are
stimulated by events at the L1, L2 etc., will result in INCONCLUSIVE rather than FAIL verdicts being
assigned.
PTC2 is only activated in a small set of test cases that test the handling of two calls at one time. In test
cases which verify that the IUT rejects invalid or unacceptable SETUP messages, no PTC is activated at
all, as these rejection procedures are considered local to the access between IUT and MTC.
The capability of the IUT to send INFORMATION and PROGRESS messages is tested in different call
states. Implicit send events have to be used in this small set of test cases, as the sending of those
messages cannot be triggered via a PTC. Separate PIXIT questions are asked for each call state, if and
how it is possible for the test operator to cause the sending of the messages.

Page 11
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
4.3 Conventions for point-to-multipoint configurations
For this group, PTC3 is connected to the same basic access as the MTC. Thus messages that are sent to
the MTC via the broadcast data link will be received at PTC3 via PCO L3 as well. Both the MTC and PTC3
will send messages on the same access using the same call reference value. A distinction between the
two message flows related to the PCOs L0 and L3 can still be made, as they use different data link
entities. This approach, representing a slight modification in the test method, is illustrated in figure 3. This
shows that the part of the network considered to be the IUT is connected to both the MTC and PTC3.
PTC2 is not used in that configuration.
Master part Slave part
MTCA PTC1
CPA1
CPA3
PTC3
L0 PCO
L3 PCO
CES1 CES2 L1 PCO
IUT
Basic access point-to-multipoint
NETWORK
Figure 3: Multi-party test method - modified for point-to-multipoint configurations
5 Untestable test purposes
There are no untestable test purposes associated with this ATS and ATM.

Page 12
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
6 ATS conventions
This clause is structured similarly to the structure of a TTCN ATS. However, the names of the subclauses
are arranged in a way more suitable to this ETS.
6.1 Declarations part
6.1.1 Type definitions
6.1.1.1 Simple type definitions
Where appropriate, simple types have a length, a value list or a range restriction attached.
Simple types defined as being of some string type (e.g. BIT STRING, OCTET STRING), have a length
restriction or a value list attached.
Simple types, defined as being of INTEGER type, have a value list or a range restriction attached.
6.1.1.2 Structured type definitions
6.1.1.2.1 TTCN structured type definitions
All structured type definitions are provided with a full name.
All elements in every structured type definition, defined as being of some string type (e.g. BIT STRING,
OCTET STRING), have a length restriction attached.
If an element in a structured type definition is defined as being of a referenced type, the (possible)
restriction is defined in that referenced type.
For information elements the identifier, which is unique for each element, has its type defined as a simple
type where the value list is restricted to the single value which is the identifier itself. This has the
advantage that it allows a test system derived from this ATS to easily identify information elements
embedded in messages. An ATS where information element identifiers are represented as unrestricted
types can present difficulties for a derived test system in the case where it needs to find one information
element embedded in a number of others and the constraints for the other elements have the any-or-omit
value. In such a case the test system cannot easily find the beginning of each information element.
6.1.1.2.2 ASN.1 structured type definitions
There are no ASN.1 structured type definitions in the ATS.
6.1.1.3 ASP type definitions
6.1.1.3.1 TTCN ASP type definitions
TTCN ASP type definitions only contain one PDU or no PDU at all.
All TTCN ASP type definitions are provided with a full identifier.
Some ASPs are not parameterized as shown in the example in table 1. Such ASPs are only used for
requesting or receiving service from the lower layer.
Table 1: TTCN ASP type definition DL_REL_IN
TTCN ASP Type Definition
ASP NAME : DL_REL_IN
(DL_RELEASE_INDICATION)
PCO Type : SAP
Comments :
Parameter Name           |   Parameter Type    |    Comments
Detailed Comments :
Page 13
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
Table 2 shows an example of a parameterized ASP. All ASPs containing PDUs contain only that PDU and
no other parameters.
Table 2: TTCN ASP type definition DL_DATA_RQ
TTCN ASP Type Definition
ASP NAME : DL_DATA_RQ
(DL_DATA_REQUEST)
PCO Type : SAP
Comments :
Parameter Name           |   Parameter Type    |    Comments
mun (MessageUnit)         |PDU            |
Detailed Comments :
6.1.1.3.2 ASN.1 ASP type definitions
There are no ASN.1 ASP type definitions in the ATS.
6.1.1.4 PDU type definitions
6.1.1.4.1 TTCN PDU type definitions
The TTCN PDU type reflects the actual data being transferred or received. All PDUs are embedded in
ASPs.
If a specific PDU type definition contains elements defined in terms of a pre-defined type, that element has
a restriction attached to it.
6.1.1.4.2 ASN.1 PDU type definitions
There are no ASN.1 PDU type definitions in the ATS.
6.1.2 Test suite constants
Each test suite constant is defined in terms of a predefined type or a referenced type. The values given in
the value column will remain unchanged throughout the test suite.
6.1.3 Test suite parameters
Each test suite parameter is defined in terms of a predefined type or a referenced type. A referenced type
is used when it is necessary to attach restrictions to these type definitions (it is not allowed to include
restrictions directly in the test suite parameter table). The referenced type can have a length or value
restriction attached to it in its declaration table.
6.1.4 Variables
6.1.4.1 Test suite variables
No test suite variables are used or defined in this ATS.
6.1.4.2 Test case variables
Each test case variable is defined in terms of a predefined type or a referenced type. A referenced type is
used when it is necessary to attach restrictions to these type definitions (it is not allowed to include
restrictions directly in the test case variable table). The referenced type can have a length or value
restriction attached to it in its declaration table.
Where test case variables are used in constraints, they are passed as formal parameters.
6.1.5 Test suite operation definitions
The description part of a test suite operation definition uses either natural language or meta C.

Page 14
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
Table 3: Test suite operation definition ASSIGN_CHI
Test Suite Operation Definition
Operation Name : ASSIGN_CHI(basic, primary : CHI; basic_flag : BOOLEAN)
Result Type  : CHI
Comments    : This operation is used to assign a correct Channel identification information
element to PDUs dependent on the type of access that is tested.
Description
CHI ASSIGN_CHI(basic,primary,basic_flag)
If the value of the basic_flag is set to TRUE, the result of the operation ASSIGN_CHI will be
the value represented by the parameter basic which is of type CHI. Else the operation results in
the value represented by the parameter primary.
Examples:
ASSIGN_CHI(CHI1b_R1, CHI1p_R1, TRUE) = CHI1b_R1
ASSIGN_CHI(CHI1b_R1, CHI1p_R1, FALSE) = CHI1p_R1
Detailed comments :
The test suite operation definition shown in table 3 is used in the constraints part when assigning an
element of type CHI a value. The CHI type can be defined in two ways depending on whether the ATS is
testing basic or primary rate access. To avoid duplicate types and thereby duplicate test cases this
operation is used to assign a value to an element of CHI type. It takes three parameters:
SULPDU\DFRQVWUDLQWRIW\SH&+,YDOLGIRU3ULPDU\UDWHDFFHVV
EDVLFDFRQVWUDLQWRIW\SH&+,YDOLGIRU%DVLFDFFHVV
EDVLFBIODJD%RROHDQYDOXH758(LIEDVLFDFFHVVLVDSSOLFDEOH)$/6(RWKHUZLVH
This operation returns the correct constraint according to the Boolean flag basic_flag. That constraint will
then be assigned to the specific element of type CHI.
6.2 Constraints part
6.2.1 Structured type constraint declaration
For every structured type definition there exists one or more structured type constraint.
6.2.2 ASN.1 type constraint declaration
There are no ASN.1 type constraint declarations in the ATS.
6.2.3 ASP type constraint declaration
6.2.3.1 ASN.1 ASP type constraint declaration
There are no ASN.1 ASP type constraint declarations in the ATS.
6.2.3.2 TTCN ASP type constraint declaration
The PDUs to be sent or received are passed to the TTCN ASP constraint declarations Ms and Mr as
parameters of meta type PDU. Only if values inside a specific PDU have to be referenced, the use of the
meta type PDU is not allowed according to ISO/IEC 9646-3 [7]. In such cases different TTCN ASP
constraint declarations are used, that are defined to carry only a specific type of PDU (e.g. SETUP).
Table 4 shows an example of such a TTCN ASP constraint declaration.
Table 4: TTCN ASP constraint declaration Sr
TTCN ASP Constraint Declaration
Constraint Name : Sr(PARAM: SETUP_PDU)
ASP Type    : DL_DAT_IN_SETUP
Derivation Path :
Comments    : ASP to indicate the receipt of SETUP messages.
Parameter Name           |   Parameter Value    |    Comments
mun                |PARAM            |
Detailed Comments :
Page 15
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
All ASP constraints have a specific value for its parameter. No matching symbols are used in ASPs.
6.2.4 PDU type constraint declaration
6.2.4.1 ASN.1 PDU type constraint declaration
There are no ASN.1 PDU type constraint declarations in the ATS.
6.2.4.2 TTCN PDU type constraint declaration
PDU constraints are used for assigning values or patterns to the data being sent or received.
6.2.5 Derived constraints
Derived constraints are used in this ATS only for SETUP and ERROR PDUs.
6.2.6 Parameterized constraints
Parameterized constraints are used in this ATS.
6.2.7 Value assignment
6.2.7.1 Specific values
For specific value assignment both explicit values and references to explicit values are used.
6.2.7.2 Matching values
As matching values the following mechanisms are used:
Instead of Value:
AnyOrOmit "*"
AnyValue "?"
Omit "-"
Inside value:
AnyOne "?"
AnyOrNone "*"
6.3 Dynamic part
6.3.1 Test cases
Each test case contains the test purpose text from ETS 300 403-6 [4]. To be able to read and understand
the test case dynamic behaviour it is recommended that the test steps are understood first.
6.3.2 Test steps
Much use has been made of test steps to avoid needless repetition of dynamic behaviour.
6.3.3 Defaults
Note the use of the RETURN statement which is defined in DAM1 of ISO/IEC 9646-3 [7]. This allows valid
background behaviour to be handled in the default tree with a possibility to return to the original set of
alternatives in the test case.
7 ATS to TP map
The identifiers used for the TPs are reused as test case names. Thus there is a straightforward one-to-
one mapping.
Page 16
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
8 PCTR conformance
A test laboratory, when requested by a client to produce a PCTR, is required, as specified in
ISO/IEC 9646-5 [9], to produce a PCTR conformant with the PCTR template given in annex B of
ISO/IEC 9646-5 [9].
Furthermore, a test laboratory, offering testing for the ATS specification contained in annex C, when
requested by a client to produce a PCTR, is required to produce a PCTR conformant with the PCTR
proforma contained in annex A of this ETS.
A PCTR which conforms to this PCTR proforma specification shall preserve the content and ordering of
the clauses contained in annex A. Clause A.6 of the PCTR may contain additional columns. If included,
these shall be placed to the right of the existing columns. Text in italics may be retained by the test
laboratory.
9 PIXIT conformance
A test realizer, producing an Executable Test Suite (ExTS) for the ATS specification contained in annex C,
is required, as specified in ISO/IEC 9646-4 [8], to produce an augmented partial PIXIT proforma
conformant with this partial PIXIT proforma specification.
An augmented partial PIXIT proforma which conforms to this partial PIXIT proforma specification shall, as
a minimum, have contents which are technically equivalent to annex B. The augmented partial PIXIT
proforma may contain additional questions that need to be answered in order to prepare the Means Of
Testing (MOT) for a particular IUT.
A test laboratory, offering testing for the ATS specification contained in annex C, is required, as specified
in ISO/IEC 9646-5 [9], to further augment the augmented partial PIXIT proforma to produce a PIXIT
proforma conformant with this partial PIXIT proforma specification.
A PIXIT proforma which conforms to this partial PIXIT proforma specification shall, as a minimum, have
contents which are technically equivalent to annex B. The PIXIT proforma may contain additional
questions that need to be answered in order to prepare the test laboratory for a particular IUT.
10 ATS conformance
The test realizer, producing MOT and ExTS for this ATS specification, shall comply with the requirements
of ISO/IEC 9646-4 [8]. In particular, these concern the realization of an ExTS based on each ATS. The
test realizer shall provide a statement of conformance of the MOT to this ATS specification.
An ExTS which conforms to this ATS specification shall contain test groups and test cases which are
technically equivalent to those contained in the ATS in annex C. All sequences of test events comprising
an abstract test case shall be capable of being realized in the executable test case. Any further checking
which the test system might be capable of performing is outside the scope of this ATS specification and
shall not contribute to the verdict assignment for each test case.
Test laboratories running conformance test services using this ATS shall comply with ISO/IEC 9646-5 [9].
A test laboratory which claims to conform to this ATS specification shall use an MOT which conforms to
this ATS.
Page 17
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
Annex A (normative): Protocol Conformance Test Report (PCTR) proforma
Notwithstanding the provisions of the copyright clause related to the text of this ETS, ETSI grants that
users of this ETS may freely reproduce the PCTR proforma in this annex so that it can be used for its
intended purposes and may further publish the completed PCTR.
A.1 Identification summary
A.1.1 Protocol conformance test report
PCTR number:
PCTR date:
Corresponding SCTR number:
Corresponding SCTR date:
Test laboratory identification:
Test laboratory manager:
Signature:
A.1.2 IUT identification
Name:
Version:
Protocol specification: ETS 300 403-1
PICS:
Previous PCTRs (if any):
A.1.3 Testing environment
PIXIT reference number:
ATS specification: ETS 300 403-7
Abstract test method: Multi-party test method (see ISO/IEC 9646-2)
Means of testing identification:
Dates of testing:
Conformance log reference(s):
Retention date for log reference(s):

Page 18
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
A.1.4 Limits and reservations
Additional information relevant to the technical contents or further use of the test report, or to the rights
and obligations of the test laboratory and the client, may be given here. Such information may include
restriction on the publication of the report.
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
A.1.5 Comments
Additional comments may be given by either the client or the test laboratory on any of the contents of the
PCTR, for example, to note disagreement between the two parties.
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
A.2 IUT conformance status
This IUT has / has not been shown by conformance assessment to be non-conforming to the specified
protocol specification.
Strike the appropriate words in this sentence. If the PICS for this IUT is consistent with the static
conformance requirements (as specified in clause A.3 of this report) and there are no "FAIL" verdicts to be
recorded (in clause A.6) strike the word "has", otherwise strike the words "has not".
A.3 Static conformance summary
The PICS for this IUT is / is not consistent with the static conformance requirements in the specified
protocol.
Strike the appropriate words in this sentence.
A.4 Dynamic conformance summary
The test campaign did / did not reveal errors in the IUT.
Strike the appropriate words in this sentence. If there are no "FAIL" verdicts to be recorded (in clause A.6
of this report) strike the word "did", otherwise strike the words "did not".
Summary of the results of groups of tests:
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................

Page 19
ETS 300 403-7: April 1998
A.5 Static conformance review report
If clause A.3 indicates non-conformance, this clause itemizes the mismatches between the PICS and the
static conformance requirements of the specified protocol specification.
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
A.6 Test campaign report
Call state N00
ATS reference Selected? Run? Verdict Observations
(Y/N) (Y/N)
L3N_N00_V_001
L3N_N00_V_002
L3N_N00_V_003
L3N_N00_V_004
L3N_N00_V_005
L3N_N00_V_006
L3N_N00_V_007
L3N_N00_V_008
L3N_N00_V_009
L3N_N00_V_010
L3N_N00_V_011
L3N_N00_V_012
L3N_N00_V_013
L3N_N00_V_014
L3N_N00_V_015
L3N_N00_V_016
L3N_N00_V_017
L3N_N00_V_018
L3N_N00_V_019
L3N_N00_V_020
L3N_N00_V_021
L3N_N00_V_022
L3N_N00_V_023
L3N_N00_V_024
L3N_N00_V_025
L3N_N00_V_026
L3N_N00_V_027
L3N_N00_V_028
L3N_N00_V_029
(continued)
Page 20
ETS 300 403-7:
...