A UML Profile for Communicating Systems

  • Constantin Werner
  • Sebastian Kraatz
  • Dieter Hogrefe
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4320)


This paper presents a UML 2 profile for communicating systems. It is driven by the experience of SDL and uses formal constraints for profile definition and mapping rules by means of OCL. It features language elements for high-level specification and description of Internet communication and signaling protocols where SDL is not optimally suited. Due to its support of several concrete notations, this profile is aligned to work with several UML 2 compliant modeling tools. In addition, an implementation by an XSLT-based mapping from UML to behavioral and structural SDL specifications is available. The intention of the paper is to present the main work done which is defining an actual profile and mapping this to SDL.


Unify Modeling Language Object Constraint Language Abstract Syntax Unify Modeling Language Model European Telecommunication Standard Institute 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    International Telecommunication Union: Specification and Description Language (SDL), ITU-T Recommendation Z.100 (August 2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure version 2.0, formal/05-07-04 (August 2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    International Telecommunication Union: SDL combined with UML, ITU-T Recommendation Z.109 (November 1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    International Telecommunication Union: UML Profile for SDL (Input for Z.109 revision) TDV09r10, Temporary Document TD 3171R1, restricted availability (April 2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    European Telecommunications Standards Institute: UML Profile for Communicating Systems, ETSI Specification (June 2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grammes, R., Gotzhein, R.: Towards the Harmonization of UML and SDL, Syntactic and Semantic Alignment, Technical Report 327/03, Computer Science Department, Technical University of Kaiserslautern, Germany (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bourduas, S., Khendek, F., Vincent, D.: From MSC and UML to SDL. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC 2002), 0730-3157/2. IEEE Computer society, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Werner, C., Fu, X., Hogrefe, D.: Modeling Route Change in Soft-State Signaling Protocols Using SDL: A Case of RSVP. In: Prinz, A., Reed, R., Reed, J. (eds.) SDL 2005. LNCS, vol. 3530, pp. 174–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Melia, T., Aguiar, R., Sarma, A., Hogrefe, D.: Case study on the use of SDL for Specifying an IETF micro mobility. In: COMSWARE 2006 International Conference on Communication Systems. IEEE Communications Society, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Werner, C., Hogrefe, D.: UML Profile for Communicating Systems, Technical Report, Institute for Informatics, University of Göttingen, ISSN 1611-1044, IFI-TB-2006-03, Germany (March 2006),
  11. 11.
    Object Management Group: OCL 2.0 Specification, Version 2.0, ptc/2005-06-06 (June 2005),
  12. 12.
    Braek, R., et al.: TIMe – The integrated method, Sintef Report (1999),
  13. 13.
    Object Management Group: Meta Object Facility (MOF) 2.0 XMI Mapping Specification, v2.1, formal/05-09-01 (September 2005),
  14. 14.
    Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure version 2.1, ptc/06-04-02 (April 2006),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Constantin Werner
    • 1
  • Sebastian Kraatz
    • 1
  • Dieter Hogrefe
    • 1
  1. 1.Telematics GroupUniversity of GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations