Advertisement

Generating Protocol Software from CPN Models Annotated with Pragmatics

  • Kent Inge Fagerland Simonsen
  • Lars M. Kristensen
  • Ekkart Kindler
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8195)

Abstract

Model-driven software engineering (MDSE) provides a foundation for automatically generating software based on models that focus on the problem domain while abstracting from the details of underlying implementation platforms. Coloured Petri Nets (CPNs) have been widely used to formally model and verify protocol software, but limited work exists on using CPN models of protocols as a basis for automated code generation. The contribution of this paper is a method for generating protocol software from a class of CPN models annotated with code generation pragmatics. Our code generation method consists of three main steps: automatically adding so-called derived pragmatics to the CPN model, computing an abstract template tree, which associates pragmatics with code templates, and applying the templates to generate code which can then be compiled. We illustrate our method using a unidirectional data framing protocol.

Keywords

Code Generation Access Control System Atomic Block Substitution Transition Automate Code Generation 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alanen, M., Lilius, J., Porres, I., Truscan, D.: On modeling techniques for supporting model driven development of protocol processing applications. In: Model-Driven Software Development, pp. 305–328. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baier, C., Katoen., J. -P.: Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Billington, J., Gallasch, G.E., Han, B.: A coloured Petri net approach to protocol verification. In: Desel, J., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ACPN 2003. LNCS, vol. 3098, pp. 210–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.: Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice. Synthesis Lectures on Software Engineering. Morgan & Claypool Publishers (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Budkowski, S., Dembinski, P.: An introduction to Estelle: A specification language for distributed systems. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 14(1), 3–23 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buse, R.P.L., Weimer, W.R.: A metric for software readability. In: Proc. of ISSTA 2008, pp. 121–130. ACM, NY (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choppy, C., Dedova, A., Evangelista, S., Hong, S., Klai, K., Petrucci, L.: The NEO Protocol for Large-Scale Distributed Database Systems: Modelling and Initial Verification. In: Lilius, J., Penczek, W. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6128, pp. 145–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hannikainen, M., Knuutila, J., Hamalainen, T., Saarinen, J.: Using SDL for implementing a wireless medium access control protocol. In: Proc. International Symposium on Multimedia Software Engineering, pp. 229–236 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jensen, K.: Coloured Petri nets and invariant methods. Theoretical Computer Science 14, 317–336 (1981)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jensen, K., Kristensen, L.M.: Coloured Petri Nets - Modelling and Validation of Concurrent Systems. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kristensen, L.M., Mechlenborg, P., Zhang, L., Mitchell, B., Gallasch, G.E.: Model-based development of a course of action scheduling tool. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 10, 5–14 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simonsen, K.I.F., Kristensen, L.M.: Towards a CPN-based modelling approach for reconciling verification and implementation of protocol models. In: Machado, R.J., Maciel, R.S.P., Rubin, J., Botterweck, G. (eds.) MOMPES 2012. LNCS, vol. 7706, pp. 106–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kristensen, L.M., Westergaard, M.: Automatic Structure-Based Code Generation from Coloured Petri Nets: A Proof of Concept. In: Kowalewski, S., Roveri, M. (eds.) FMICS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6371, pp. 215–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kristensen, L.M., Simonsen, K.I.F.: Applications of Coloured Petri Nets for Functional Validation of Protocol Designs. In: Jensen, K., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Balbo, G., Koutny, M., Wolf, K. (eds.) ToPNoC VII. LNCS, vol. 7480, pp. 56–115. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leduc, G., Germeau, F.: Verification of security protocols using LOTOS-method and application. Computer Communications 23(12), 1089–1103 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mortensen, K.H.: Automatic code generation method based on coloured Petri net models applied on an access control system. In: Nielsen, M., Simpson, D. (eds.) ICATPN 2000. LNCS, vol. 1825, pp. 367–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Parssinen, J., von Knorring, N., Heinonen, J., Turunen, M.: In: Proc. TOOLS 2000, pp. 82–93 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    PetriCode, Project Web Site, http://kentis.github.io/nppn-cli/
  19. 19.
    Philippi, S.: Automatic code generation from high-level Petri-nets for model driven systems engineering. Journal of Systems and Software 79(10), 1444–1455 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pozza, D., Sisto, R., Durante, L.: Spi2Java: automatic cryptographic protocol Java code generation from spi calculus. In: Proc. of Advanced Information Networking and Applications, vol. 1, pp. 400–405 (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Simonsen, K.I.F., Kristensen, L.M., Kindler, E.: Code generation for protocols from CPN models annotated with pragmatics – extended abstract. In: 24th Nordic Workshop on Programming Theory (November 2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Simonsen, K.I.F., Kristensen, L.M., Kindler, E.: Code Generation for Protocol Software from CPN models Annotated with Pragmatics. Technical Report IMM-Technical Reports-2013-01, Technical University of Denmark, DTU Informatics (January 2013), http://bit.ly/WwH2hf
  23. 23.
    Suzuki, I.: Formal analysis of the alternating bit protocol by temporal Petri nets. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 16(11), 1273–1281 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wagstaff, K., Peters, K., Scharenbroich, L.: From protocol specification to statechart to implementation. Technical Report CL08-4014, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kent Inge Fagerland Simonsen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lars M. Kristensen
    • 1
  • Ekkart Kindler
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer EngineeringBergen University CollegeNorway
  2. 2.DTU ComputeTechnical University of DenmarkDenmark

Personalised recommendations