Hi,

I do not agree with the view, that TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 conversion is unimportant (even if said implicitly only). I'm quite convinced, that users will not want to keep, support and maintain two different test systems (with all the test environment consequences).

As most of the test suites written in TTCN-2 need to be updated, amended or modified due to protocol changes/amendments and errors found in existing ATSs or changed in some way just to re-use for another purposes (like reusing ISUP test suites for BICC testing), there will be a definite moment in time when existing TTCN-2 test suites need to be converted to TTCN-3 and all further work has to be done on the TTCN-3 version. So, my opinion is, that MAXIMUM compatibility shall be assured between TTCN-2 and TTCN-3 to make conversion as straightforward as possible.

But maximum, of course, does not mean 100 % for all means. For the given example, TSVar's, I agree with Johan, that parameterization of test cases (and all functions, test steps they are calling) can be a reasonable solution. I do not see even the need to create any record of the TSVs defined in the TTCN-2 test suites as speaking about hundred of TSVs is not the realistic situation. As a rule, there is only a "few" TSV used to store some global (i.e. not changing from test case to test case) data allocated by the IUT dynamically (as for static parameters TSPs are used as a rule).

Anyway, I think that the exact solution to be left to tool providers (though, I do not think there will be a great variety of solutions).

Best Regards, György
Ãœdv, Gyuri
============================================
dr. György RÉTHY
Ericsson Communications Systems Hungary Lim.
Conformance Center
tel.: +36 1 437-7006; fax: +36 1 437-7767
mobile: +36 30 297-7862
e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
web: www.r.eth.ericsson.se/~ethgry
============================================


>

---

Original Message

---

>From: Vesa-Matti Puro [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 2:10 AM
>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>Subject: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s and
>its TTCN-3 counterpart
>
>
>Hi all,
>
>I agree with Claude's comment that it is much more realistic
>to think of
>preserving and using TTCN-2 test suites and test systems as is and
>developing new systems in TTCN-3 or TTCN-2 as it is seems to be
>suitable. We have prepared some slides about the topic that are
>available from:
>www.openttcn.com/Publications/Migration
>
>Claude Desroches wrote:
> >> I fully agree given the fact that the need for global variables is
> >> only to allow2 to 3 transformation. One can always choose to
> >> transform as much as possible from TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 then redesign
> >> any parts related to global variables directly in TTCN-3. Who says
> >> that the transformation needs to be 100% automated? (It
>is better of
> >> course, but then again, how much of a problem does or will it
> >> present). The likely situation is that most existing TTCN-2 ATSs
> >> will continue to be maintained using TTCN-2, and only new ATSs will
> >> be developed from scratch using TTCN-3.
> >>
> >> Only in rare cases will there be a real need to transform
>an existing
> >> ATS from TTCN2 to TTCN-3 to take advantage of TTCN-3 features. In
> >> most cases however, I suspect that the cheapest and
>easiest approach
> >> will be to keep the apples with the apples and plant some orange
> >> trees. (apples = TTCN2) orange trees = TTCN3). [:-)] .
> >> ATS needs Keep in mind that we are only talking about
>existing TTCN-2
> >> test suites that
>
>I think that it is as realistic to interpret the TTCN-3 and TTCN-2 code
>directly and interface to the existing code using some kind of
>middleware solution as it is to generate C code...
>
>Johan Nordin wrote:
> >> are to be converted into TTCN-3. Today, these test suites are used
> >> for generating C code (there's no realistic alternative). The users
> >> are likely to have written other code to be compiled with the
> >> generated C code, like encoders/decoders, user I/F etc.
> >> If this is to be reused, the user would have to go for a C solution
> >> in their TTCN-3 system as well.
>
>Excellent New Year for all!
>Vesa-Matti
>
>--
>
>Vesa-Matti Puro
>Expert
>Open Environment Software Oy
>www.openttcn.com
>

I agree with the sentiment, but as a matter of fact, have a look at the
Phase 2 GSM suites for huge numbers of variables. Admittedly, many were
never used in any one ATS, they were just "all always there" across several
suites.

Regards

Derek

---

Derek C Lazenby
Anite
127 Fleet Road
Fleet
Hampshire
GU51 3QN
Tel : +44 1252 775200
Fax: +44 1252 775299

---

Anite Telecoms Limited Registered in England No. 1721900 Registered
Office: 100 Longwater Avenue, GreenPark, Reading, Berkshire RG2 6GP,
United Kingdom

---

Original Message

---

From: Gyorgy Rethy (ETH) [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
Sent: 08 January 2002 16:55
To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Subject: Re: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s
an d its TTCN-3 counterpart


Hi,

I do not agree with the view, that TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 conversion is
unimportant (even if said implicitly only). I'm quite convinced, that users
will not want to keep, support and maintain two different test systems (with
all the test environment consequences).

As most of the test suites written in TTCN-2 need to be updated, amended or
modified due to protocol changes/amendments and errors found in existing
ATSs or changed in some way just to re-use for another purposes (like
reusing ISUP test suites for BICC testing), there will be a definite moment
in time when existing TTCN-2 test suites need to be converted to TTCN-3 and
all further work has to be done on the TTCN-3 version. So, my opinion is,
that MAXIMUM compatibility shall be assured between TTCN-2 and TTCN-3 to
make conversion as straightforward as possible.

But maximum, of course, does not mean 100 % for all means. For the given
example, TSVar's, I agree with Johan, that parameterization of test cases
(and all functions, test steps they are calling) can be a reasonable
solution. I do not see even the need to create any record of the TSVs
defined in the TTCN-2 test suites as speaking about hundred of TSVs is not
the realistic situation. As a rule, there is only a "few" TSV used to store
some global (i.e. not changing from test case to test case) data allocated
by the IUT dynamically (as for static parameters TSPs are used as a rule).

Anyway, I think that the exact solution to be left to tool providers
(though, I do not think there will be a great variety of solutions).

Best Regards, György
Ãœdv, Gyuri
============================================
dr. György RÉTHY
Ericsson Communications Systems Hungary Lim.
Conformance Center
tel.: +36 1 437-7006; fax: +36 1 437-7767
mobile: +36 30 297-7862
e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
web: www.r.eth.ericsson.se/~ethgry
============================================


>

---

Original Message

---

>From: Vesa-Matti Puro [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 2:10 AM
>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>Subject: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s and
>its TTCN-3 counterpart
>
>
>Hi all,
>
>I agree with Claude's comment that it is much more realistic
>to think of
>preserving and using TTCN-2 test suites and test systems as is and
>developing new systems in TTCN-3 or TTCN-2 as it is seems to be
>suitable. We have prepared some slides about the topic that are
>available from:
>www.openttcn.com/Publications/Migration
>
>Claude Desroches wrote:
> >> I fully agree given the fact that the need for global variables is
> >> only to allow2 to 3 transformation. One can always choose to
> >> transform as much as possible from TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 then redesign
> >> any parts related to global variables directly in TTCN-3. Who says
> >> that the transformation needs to be 100% automated? (It
>is better of
> >> course, but then again, how much of a problem does or will it
> >> present). The likely situation is that most existing TTCN-2 ATSs
> >> will continue to be maintained using TTCN-2, and only new ATSs will
> >> be developed from scratch using TTCN-3.
> >>
> >> Only in rare cases will there be a real need to transform
>an existing
> >> ATS from TTCN2 to TTCN-3 to take advantage of TTCN-3 features. In
> >> most cases however, I suspect that the cheapest and
>easiest approach
> >> will be to keep the apples with the apples and plant some orange
> >> trees. (apples = TTCN2) orange trees = TTCN3). [:-)] .
> >> ATS needs Keep in mind that we are only talking about
>existing TTCN-2
> >> test suites that
>
>I think that it is as realistic to interpret the TTCN-3 and TTCN-2 code
>directly and interface to the existing code using some kind of
>middleware solution as it is to generate C code...
>
>Johan Nordin wrote:
> >> are to be converted into TTCN-3. Today, these test suites are used
> >> for generating C code (there's no realistic alternative). The users
> >> are likely to have written other code to be compiled with the
> >> generated C code, like encoders/decoders, user I/F etc.
> >> If this is to be reused, the user would have to go for a C solution
> >> in their TTCN-3 system as well.
>
>Excellent New Year for all!
>Vesa-Matti
>
>--
>
>Vesa-Matti Puro
>Expert
>Open Environment Software Oy
>www.openttcn.com
>

Hi,

Which GSM Phase 2 ATS do you mean? The discussion was about test suite variables and not around test case variables (as the latter is not a problem to be declared in each test case in which it is used since its value need not be preserved among different test cases).

For example there is 4 TTCN-2 test suites in ETS 300 607-3 (GSM MS conf. test suite) but in the four ATSs no single test suite variable is defined (at least in ed.14 I have checked).

Best Regards, György
Ãœdv, Gyuri
============================================
dr. György RÉTHY
Ericsson Communications Systems Hungary Lim.
Conformance Center
tel.: +36 1 437-7006; fax: +36 1 437-7767
mobile: +36 30 297-7862
e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
web: www.r.eth.ericsson.se/~ethgry
============================================


>

---

Original Message

---

>From: Lazenby, Derek [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 6:41 PM
>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>Subject: Re: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s
>an d its TTCN-3 counterpart
>
>
>I agree with the sentiment, but as a matter of fact, have a look at the
>Phase 2 GSM suites for huge numbers of variables. Admittedly, many were
>never used in any one ATS, they were just "all always there"
>across several
>suites.
>
>Regards
>
>Derek
>
>

---

>Derek C Lazenby
>Anite
>127 Fleet Road
>Fleet
>Hampshire
>GU51 3QN
>Tel : +44 1252 775200
>Fax: +44 1252 775299
>

---

>Anite Telecoms Limited Registered in England No. 1721900 Registered
>Office: 100 Longwater Avenue, GreenPark, Reading, Berkshire RG2 6GP,
>United Kingdom
>
>
>

---

Original Message

---

>From: Gyorgy Rethy (ETH) [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>Sent: 08 January 2002 16:55
>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>Subject: Re: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s
>an d its TTCN-3 counterpart
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I do not agree with the view, that TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 conversion is
>unimportant (even if said implicitly only). I'm quite
>convinced, that users
>will not want to keep, support and maintain two different test
>systems (with
>all the test environment consequences).
>
>As most of the test suites written in TTCN-2 need to be
>updated, amended or
>modified due to protocol changes/amendments and errors found
>in existing
>ATSs or changed in some way just to re-use for another purposes (like
>reusing ISUP test suites for BICC testing), there will be a
>definite moment
>in time when existing TTCN-2 test suites need to be converted
>to TTCN-3 and
>all further work has to be done on the TTCN-3 version. So, my
>opinion is,
>that MAXIMUM compatibility shall be assured between TTCN-2 and
>TTCN-3 to
>make conversion as straightforward as possible.
>
>But maximum, of course, does not mean 100 % for all means. For
>the given
>example, TSVar's, I agree with Johan, that parameterization of
>test cases
>(and all functions, test steps they are calling) can be a reasonable
>solution. I do not see even the need to create any record of the TSVs
>defined in the TTCN-2 test suites as speaking about hundred of
>TSVs is not
>the realistic situation. As a rule, there is only a "few" TSV
>used to store
>some global (i.e. not changing from test case to test case)
>data allocated
>by the IUT dynamically (as for static parameters TSPs are used
>as a rule).
>
>Anyway, I think that the exact solution to be left to tool providers
>(though, I do not think there will be a great variety of solutions).
>
>Best Regards, György
>Ãœdv, Gyuri
>============================================
>dr. György RÉTHY
>Ericsson Communications Systems Hungary Lim.
>Conformance Center
>tel.: +36 1 437-7006; fax: +36 1 437-7767
>mobile: +36 30 297-7862
>e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>web: www.r.eth.ericsson.se/~ethgry
>============================================
>
>
>>

---

Original Message

---

>>From: Vesa-Matti Puro [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 2:10 AM
>>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>>Subject: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS
>Var:s and
>>its TTCN-3 counterpart
>>
>>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I agree with Claude's comment that it is much more realistic
>>to think of
>>preserving and using TTCN-2 test suites and test systems as is and
>>developing new systems in TTCN-3 or TTCN-2 as it is seems to be
>>suitable. We have prepared some slides about the topic that are
>>available from:
>>www.openttcn.com/Publications/Migration
>>
>>Claude Desroches wrote:
>> >> I fully agree given the fact that the need for global variables is
>> >> only to allow2 to 3 transformation. One can always choose to
>> >> transform as much as possible from TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 then redesign
>> >> any parts related to global variables directly in TTCN-3. Who says
>> >> that the transformation needs to be 100% automated? (It
>>is better of
>> >> course, but then again, how much of a problem does or will it
>> >> present). The likely situation is that most existing TTCN-2 ATSs
>> >> will continue to be maintained using TTCN-2, and only new
>ATSs will
>> >> be developed from scratch using TTCN-3.
>> >>
>> >> Only in rare cases will there be a real need to transform
>>an existing
>> >> ATS from TTCN2 to TTCN-3 to take advantage of TTCN-3 features. In
>> >> most cases however, I suspect that the cheapest and
>>easiest approach
>> >> will be to keep the apples with the apples and plant some orange
>> >> trees. (apples = TTCN2) orange trees = TTCN3). [:-)] .
>> >> ATS needs Keep in mind that we are only talking about
>>existing TTCN-2
>> >> test suites that
>>
>>I think that it is as realistic to interpret the TTCN-3 and
>TTCN-2 code
>>directly and interface to the existing code using some kind of
>>middleware solution as it is to generate C code...
>>
>>Johan Nordin wrote:
>> >> are to be converted into TTCN-3. Today, these test suites are used
>> >> for generating C code (there's no realistic alternative).
>The users
>> >> are likely to have written other code to be compiled with the
>> >> generated C code, like encoders/decoders, user I/F etc.
>> >> If this is to be reused, the user would have to go for a
>C solution
>> >> in their TTCN-3 system as well.
>>
>>Excellent New Year for all!
>>Vesa-Matti
>>
>>--
>>
>>Vesa-Matti Puro
>>Expert
>>Open Environment Software Oy
>>www.openttcn.com
>>
>

Oops, maybe I confused the two, its a long time since I looked at those
ATSs. It all becomes a blur in the memory! :-)

Sorry pardon.

Regards

Derek

---

Derek C Lazenby
Anite
127 Fleet Road
Fleet
Hampshire
GU51 3QN
Tel : +44 1252 775200
Fax: +44 1252 775299

---

Anite Telecoms Limited Registered in England No. 1721900 Registered
Office: 100 Longwater Avenue, GreenPark, Reading, Berkshire RG2 6GP,
United Kingdom

---

Original Message

---

From: Gyorgy Rethy (ETH) [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
Sent: 09 January 2002 11:24
To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Subject: Re: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s
an d its TTCN-3 counterpart


Hi,

Which GSM Phase 2 ATS do you mean? The discussion was about test suite
variables and not around test case variables (as the latter is not a problem
to be declared in each test case in which it is used since its value need
not be preserved among different test cases).

For example there is 4 TTCN-2 test suites in ETS 300 607-3 (GSM MS conf.
test suite) but in the four ATSs no single test suite variable is defined
(at least in ed.14 I have checked).

Best Regards, György
Ãœdv, Gyuri
============================================
dr. György RÉTHY
Ericsson Communications Systems Hungary Lim.
Conformance Center
tel.: +36 1 437-7006; fax: +36 1 437-7767
mobile: +36 30 297-7862
e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
web: www.r.eth.ericsson.se/~ethgry
============================================


>

---

Original Message

---

>From: Lazenby, Derek [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 6:41 PM
>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>Subject: Re: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s
>an d its TTCN-3 counterpart
>
>
>I agree with the sentiment, but as a matter of fact, have a look at the
>Phase 2 GSM suites for huge numbers of variables. Admittedly, many were
>never used in any one ATS, they were just "all always there"
>across several
>suites.
>
>Regards
>
>Derek
>
>

---

>Derek C Lazenby
>Anite
>127 Fleet Road
>Fleet
>Hampshire
>GU51 3QN
>Tel : +44 1252 775200
>Fax: +44 1252 775299
>

---

>Anite Telecoms Limited Registered in England No. 1721900 Registered
>Office: 100 Longwater Avenue, GreenPark, Reading, Berkshire RG2 6GP,
>United Kingdom
>
>
>

---

Original Message

---

>From: Gyorgy Rethy (ETH) [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>Sent: 08 January 2002 16:55
>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>Subject: Re: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS Var:s
>an d its TTCN-3 counterpart
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I do not agree with the view, that TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 conversion is
>unimportant (even if said implicitly only). I'm quite
>convinced, that users
>will not want to keep, support and maintain two different test
>systems (with
>all the test environment consequences).
>
>As most of the test suites written in TTCN-2 need to be
>updated, amended or
>modified due to protocol changes/amendments and errors found
>in existing
>ATSs or changed in some way just to re-use for another purposes (like
>reusing ISUP test suites for BICC testing), there will be a
>definite moment
>in time when existing TTCN-2 test suites need to be converted
>to TTCN-3 and
>all further work has to be done on the TTCN-3 version. So, my
>opinion is,
>that MAXIMUM compatibility shall be assured between TTCN-2 and
>TTCN-3 to
>make conversion as straightforward as possible.
>
>But maximum, of course, does not mean 100 % for all means. For
>the given
>example, TSVar's, I agree with Johan, that parameterization of
>test cases
>(and all functions, test steps they are calling) can be a reasonable
>solution. I do not see even the need to create any record of the TSVs
>defined in the TTCN-2 test suites as speaking about hundred of
>TSVs is not
>the realistic situation. As a rule, there is only a "few" TSV
>used to store
>some global (i.e. not changing from test case to test case)
>data allocated
>by the IUT dynamically (as for static parameters TSPs are used
>as a rule).
>
>Anyway, I think that the exact solution to be left to tool providers
>(though, I do not think there will be a great variety of solutions).
>
>Best Regards, György
>Ãœdv, Gyuri
>============================================
>dr. György RÉTHY
>Ericsson Communications Systems Hungary Lim.
>Conformance Center
>tel.: +36 1 437-7006; fax: +36 1 437-7767
>mobile: +36 30 297-7862
>e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>web: www.r.eth.ericsson.se/~ethgry
>============================================
>
>
>>

---

Original Message

---

>>From: Vesa-Matti Puro [This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.]
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 2:10 AM
>>To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>>Subject: Migration & translation in response to Re: TTCN-2 TS
>Var:s and
>>its TTCN-3 counterpart
>>
>>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I agree with Claude's comment that it is much more realistic
>>to think of
>>preserving and using TTCN-2 test suites and test systems as is and
>>developing new systems in TTCN-3 or TTCN-2 as it is seems to be
>>suitable. We have prepared some slides about the topic that are
>>available from:
>>www.openttcn.com/Publications/Migration
>>
>>Claude Desroches wrote:
>> >> I fully agree given the fact that the need for global variables is
>> >> only to allow2 to 3 transformation. One can always choose to
>> >> transform as much as possible from TTCN-2 to TTCN-3 then redesign
>> >> any parts related to global variables directly in TTCN-3. Who says
>> >> that the transformation needs to be 100% automated? (It
>>is better of
>> >> course, but then again, how much of a problem does or will it
>> >> present). The likely situation is that most existing TTCN-2 ATSs
>> >> will continue to be maintained using TTCN-2, and only new
>ATSs will
>> >> be developed from scratch using TTCN-3.
>> >>
>> >> Only in rare cases will there be a real need to transform
>>an existing
>> >> ATS from TTCN2 to TTCN-3 to take advantage of TTCN-3 features. In
>> >> most cases however, I suspect that the cheapest and
>>easiest approach
>> >> will be to keep the apples with the apples and plant some orange
>> >> trees. (apples = TTCN2) orange trees = TTCN3). [:-)] .
>> >> ATS needs Keep in mind that we are only talking about
>>existing TTCN-2
>> >> test suites that
>>
>>I think that it is as realistic to interpret the TTCN-3 and
>TTCN-2 code
>>directly and interface to the existing code using some kind of
>>middleware solution as it is to generate C code...
>>
>>Johan Nordin wrote:
>> >> are to be converted into TTCN-3. Today, these test suites are used
>> >> for generating C code (there's no realistic alternative).
>The users
>> >> are likely to have written other code to be compiled with the
>> >> generated C code, like encoders/decoders, user I/F etc.
>> >> If this is to be reused, the user would have to go for a
>C solution
>> >> in their TTCN-3 system as well.
>>
>>Excellent New Year for all!
>>Vesa-Matti
>>
>>--
>>
>>Vesa-Matti Puro
>>Expert
>>Open Environment Software Oy
>>www.openttcn.com
>>
>