Software packager user's guide

Software integration is a growing area of concern for many programmers and software managers because the need to build new programs quickly from existing components is greater than ever. This includes building versions of software products for multiple hardware platforms and operating systems, building programs from components written in different languages, and building systems from components that must execute on different machines in a distributed network. The goal of software integration is to make building new programs from existing components more seamless -- programmers should pay minimal attention to the underlying configuration issues involved. Libraries of reusable components and classes are important tools but only partial solutions to software development problems. Even though software components may have compatible interfaces, there may be other reasons, such as differences between execution environments, why they cannot be integrated. Often, components must be adapted or reimplemented to fit into another application because of implementation differences -- they are implemented in different programming languages, dependent on different operating system resources, or must execute on different physical machines. The software packager is a tool that allows programmers to deal with interfaces between software components and ignore complex integration details. The packager takes modular descriptions of the structure of a software system written in the package specification language and produces an integration program in the form of a makefile. If complex integration tools are needed to integrate a set of components, such as remote procedure call stubs, their use is implied by the packager automatically and stub generation tools are invoked in the corresponding makefile. The programmer deals only with the components themselves and not the details of how to build the system on any given platform

Concurrent engineering research center

The projects undertaken by The Concurrent Engineering Research Center (CERC) at West Virginia University are reported and summarized. CERC's participation in the Department of Defense's Defense Advanced Research Project relating to technology needed to improve the product development process is described, particularly in the area of advanced weapon systems. The efforts committed to improving collaboration among the diverse and distributed health care providers are reported, along with the research activities for NASA in Independent Software Verification and Validation. CERC also takes part in the electronic respirator certification initiated by The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, as well as in the efforts to find a solution to the problem of producing environment-friendly end-products for product developers worldwide. The 3M Fiber Metal Matrix Composite Model Factory Program is discussed. CERC technologies, facilities,and personnel-related issues are described, along with its library and technical services and recent publications

A software bus for thread objects

The authors have implemented a software bus for lightweight threads in an object-oriented programming environment that allows for rapid reconfiguration and reuse of thread objects in discrete-event simulation experiments. While previous research in object-oriented, parallel programming environments has focused on direct communication between threads, our lightweight software bus, called the MiniBus, provides a means to isolate threads from their contexts of execution by restricting communications between threads to message-passing via their local ports only. The software bus maintains a topology of connections between these ports. It routes, queues, and delivers messages according to this topology. This approach allows for rapid reconfiguration and reuse of thread objects in other systems without making changes to the specifications or source code. A layered approach that provides the needed transparency to developers is presented. Examples of using the MiniBus are given, and the value of bus architectures in building and conducting simulations of discrete-event systems is discussed

NASA/WVU Software Research Laboratory, 1995

In our second year, the NASA/WVU Software Research Lab has made significant strides toward analysis and solution of major software problems related to V&V activities. We have established working relationships with many ongoing efforts within NASA and continue to provide valuable input into policy and decision-making processes. Through our publications, technical reports, lecture series, newsletters, and resources on the World-Wide-Web, we provide information to many NASA and external parties daily. This report is a summary and overview of some of our activities for the past year. This report is divided into 6 chapters: Introduction, People, Support Activities, Process, Metrics, and Testing. The Introduction chapter (this chapter) gives an overview of our project beginnings and targets. The People chapter focuses on new people who have joined the Lab this year. The Support chapter briefly lists activities like our WWW pages, Technical Report Series, Technical Lecture Series, and Research Quarterly newsletter. Finally, the remaining four chapters discuss the major research areas that we have made significant progress towards producing meaningful task reports. These chapters can be regarded as portions of drafts of our task reports

An approach to verification and validation of a reliable multicasting protocol: Extended Abstract

This paper describes the process of implementing a complex communications protocol that provides reliable delivery of data in multicast-capable, packet-switching telecommunication networks. The protocol, called the Reliable Multicasting Protocol (RMP), was developed incrementally using a combination of formal and informal techniques in an attempt to ensure the correctness of its implementation. Our development process involved three concurrent activities: (1) the initial construction and incremental enhancement of a formal state model of the protocol machine; (2) the initial coding and incremental enhancement of the implementation; and (3) model-based testing of iterative implementations of the protocol. These activities were carried out by two separate teams: a design team and a V&V team. The design team built the first version of RMP with limited functionality to handle only nominal requirements of data delivery. This initial version did not handle off-nominal cases such as network partitions or site failures. Meanwhile, the V&V team concurrently developed a formal model of the requirements using a variant of SCR-based state tables. Based on these requirements tables, the V&V team developed test cases to exercise the implementation. In a series of iterative steps, the design team added new functionality to the implementation while the V&V team kept the state model in fidelity with the implementation. This was done by generating test cases based on suspected errant or off-nominal behaviors predicted by the current model. If the execution of a test in the model and implementation agreed, then the test either found a potential problem or verified a required behavior. However, if the execution of a test was different in the model and implementation, then the differences helped identify inconsistencies between the model and implementation. In either case, the dialogue between both teams drove the co-evolution of the model and implementation. We have found that this interactive, iterative approach to development allows software designers to focus on delivery of nominal functionality while the V&V team can focus on analysis of off nominal cases. Testing serves as the vehicle for keeping the model and implementation in fidelity with each other. This paper describes (1) our experiences in developing our process model; and (2) three example problems found during the development of RMP. Although RMP has provided our research effort with a rich set of test cases, it also has practical applications within NASA. For example, RMP is being considered for use in the NASA EOSDIS project due to its significant performance benefits in applications that need to replicate large amounts of data to many network sites

An Approach to Verification and Validation of a Reliable Multicasting Protocol

This paper describes the process of implementing a complex communications protocol that provides reliable delivery of data in multicast-capable, packet-switching telecommunication networks. The protocol, called the Reliable Multicasting Protocol (RMP), was developed incrementally using a combination of formal and informal techniques in an attempt to ensure the correctness of its implementation. Our development process involved three concurrent activities: (1) the initial construction and incremental enhancement of a formal state model of the protocol machine; (2) the initial coding and incremental enhancement of the implementation; and (3) model-based testing of iterative implementations of the protocol. These activities were carried out by two separate teams: a design team and a V&V team. The design team built the first version of RMP with limited functionality to handle only nominal requirements of data delivery. In a series of iterative steps, the design team added new functionality to the implementation while the V&V team kept the state model in fidelity with the implementation. This was done by generating test cases based on suspected errant or offnominal behaviors predicted by the current model. If the execution of a test was different between the model and implementation, then the differences helped identify inconsistencies between the model and implementation. The dialogue between both teams drove the co-evolution of the model and implementation. Testing served as the vehicle for keeping the model and implementation in fidelity with each other. This paper describes (1) our experiences in developing our process model; and (2) three example problems found during the development of RMP

Development and analysis of SCR requirements tables for system scenarios

We describe the use of scenarios to develop and refine requirement tables for parts of the Earth Observing System Data and Information System (EOSDIS). The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is developing EOSDIS as part of its Mission-To-Planet-Earth (MTPE) project to accept instrument/platform observation requests from end-user scientists, schedule and perform requested observations of the Earth from space, collect and process the observed data, and distribute data to scientists and archives. Current requirements for the system are managed with tools that allow developers to trace the relationships between requirements and other development artifacts, including other requirements. In addition, the user community (e.g., earth and atmospheric scientists), in conjunction with NASA, has generated scenarios describing the actions of EOSDIS subsystems in response to user requests and other system activities. As part of a research effort in verification and validation techniques, this paper describes our efforts to develop requirements tables from these scenarios for the EOSDIS Core System (ECS). The tables specify event-driven mode transitions based on techniques developed by the Naval Research Lab's (NRL) Software Cost Reduction (SCR) project. The SCR approach has proven effective in specifying requirements for large systems in an unambiguous, terse format that enhance identification of incomplete and inconsistent requirements. We describe development of SCR tables from user scenarios and identify the strengths and weaknesses of our approach in contrast to the requirements tracing approach. We also evaluate the capabilities of both approach to respond to the volatility of requirements in large, complex systems

Software Packaging

Many computer programs cannot be easily integrated because their components are distributed and heterogeneous, i.e., they are implemented in diverse programming languages, use different data representation formats, or their runtime environments are incom patible. In many cases, programs are integrated by modifying their components or interposing mechanisms that handle communication and conversion tasks. For example, remote procedure call (RPC) helps integrate heterogeneous, distributed programs. When conf iguring such programs, however, mechanisms like RPC must be used explicitly by software developers in order to integrate collections of diverse components. Each collection may require a unique integration solution. This thesis describes a process called software packaging that automatically determines how to integrate a diverse collection of computer programs based on the types of components involved and the capabilities of available translators and adapters in an environment. Whereas previous efforts focused solely on integration mechanisms, software packaging provides a context that relates such mechanisms to software integration processes. We demonstrate the value of this approach by reducing the cost of configuring applications whose components are distributed and implemented in different programming languages. Our software packaging tool subsumes traditional integration tools like UNIX MAKE by providing a rule-based approach to software integration that is independent of execution environments. (Also cross-referenced as UMIACS-TR-93-56

Reliable multicast protocol specifications protocol operations

This appendix contains the complete state tables for Reliable Multicast Protocol (RMP) Normal Operation, Multi-RPC Extensions, Membership Change Extensions, and Reformation Extensions. First the event types are presented. Afterwards, each RMP operation state, normal and extended, is presented individually and its events shown. Events in the RMP specification are one of several things: (1) arriving packets, (2) expired alarms, (3) user events, (4) exceptional conditions

Reliable multicast protocol specifications flow control and NACK policy

This appendix presents the flow and congestion control schemes recommended for RMP and a NACK policy based on the whiteboard tool. Because RMP uses a primarily NACK based error detection scheme, there is no direct feedback path through which receivers can signal losses through low buffer space or congestion. Reliable multicast protocols also suffer from the fact that throughput for a multicast group must be divided among the members of the group. This division is usually very dynamic in nature and therefore does not lend itself well to a priori determination. These facts have led the flow and congestion control schemes of RMP to be made completely orthogonal to the protocol specification. This allows several differing schemes to be used in different environments to produce the best results. As a default, a modified sliding window scheme based on previous algorithms are suggested and described below