Dlms Yellow Book PDF

TECHNICAL REPORT
Companion Specification
for Energy Metering
DLMS/COSEM
Conformance
Testing Process
DLMS User Association
device ™
language
message
specification
Reference number: EXCERPT FROM DLMS UA 1001-1:2007, Third Edition

© Copyright 2007 DLMS User Association
DLMS User Association, EXCERPT FROM COSEM Conformance test process, 3d edition
Table of Contents
1. Foreword ........................................................................................................................................ 4
2. Scope ............................................................................................................................................. 5
3. Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 6
3.1 Referenced documents........................................................................................................... 6
3.2 Terms and definitions.............................................................................................................. 6
3.3 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ 13
4. Conformance testing - overview................................................................................................... 16
4.1 OSI conformance testing ...................................................................................................... 16
4.2 DLMS/COSEM conformance testing .................................................................................... 16
4.3 Main features of DLMS/COSEM conformance testing ......................................................... 18
5. The conformance test plans......................................................................................................... 19
5.1 Scope of testing .................................................................................................................... 19
5.2 Device testing........................................................................................................................ 20
5.3 Structure of the conformance test plans ............................................................................... 20
5.4 Abstract test cases................................................................................................................ 21
5.5 Test outcomes and verdicts .................................................................................................. 22
5.6 Conformance test plan for the Data link layer using HDLC protocol .................................... 23
5.6.1 Version 2.0..................................................................................................................... 23
5.6.2 Version 4.1..................................................................................................................... 23
5.7 Conformance test plan for the COSEM application layer ..................................................... 23
5.7.1 Version 2.0..................................................................................................................... 23
5.7.2 Version 4.1..................................................................................................................... 23
5.8 Conformance test plan for COSEM interface objects........................................................... 24
5.8.1 Version 2.0..................................................................................................................... 24
5.8.2 Version 4.2..................................................................................................................... 24
6. The DLMS/COSEM conformance test tool .................................................................................. 25
6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 25
6.2 Licensing the CTT................................................................................................................. 25
7. The conformance assessment process ....................................................................................... 26
7.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................... 26
7.2 Preparation for testing........................................................................................................... 27
7.2.1 Preparation of the IUT ................................................................................................... 27
7.2.2 Production of the CTI..................................................................................................... 27
7.3 Test operations ..................................................................................................................... 28
7.3.1 Review of the CTI .......................................................................................................... 28
7.3.2 Test selection and parameterization.............................................................................. 28
7.3.3 Test campaigns ............................................................................................................. 28
7.4 Documents generated by the CTT........................................................................................ 29
7.4.1 Conformance test report ................................................................................................ 29
7.4.2 Conformance log ........................................................................................................... 29
7.4.3 Line traffic ...................................................................................................................... 29
7.4.4 Viewing the conformance test plans.............................................................................. 29
7.4.5 Viewing the test scripts .................................................................................................. 30
7.4.6 The “Create snapshot” feature ...................................................................................... 30
7.4.7 The “Create certification report” feature ........................................................................ 30
7.5 Repeatability of results.......................................................................................................... 30
7.6 Requirements for test laboratories........................................................................................ 30
8. The certification process .............................................................................................................. 31
8.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 31
DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 2/35

8.2 Initiation of the certification process...................................................................................... 31

8.3 Submission of conformance test documents........................................................................ 31
8.4 The certification..................................................................................................................... 31
8.5 Scope and validity of the certification ................................................................................... 32
8.6 Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................. 32
8.7 Reproduction of conformance tests by the DLMS UA .......................................................... 32
9. The quality program ..................................................................................................................... 33
9.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 33
9.2 Validation of the conformance test plans and the CTT......................................................... 33
9.3 Assistance provided to users................................................................................................ 33
9.4 Maintenance.......................................................................................................................... 33
9.5 Use cases ............................................................................................................................. 34
9.5.1 Use case 1 – introducing a new standard OBIS code................................................... 34
9.5.2 Use case 2 – modification of an existing test ................................................................ 34
9.5.3 Use case 3 – adding a test for a new standard feature................................................. 34
9.5.4 Use case 4 – revision of the specification ..................................................................... 34
Annex A Certificate template.............................................................................................................. 35

1. Foreword
Copyright
© Copyright 1997–2007 DLMS User Association.
This document is confidential. It may not be copied, nor handed over to persons outside the
standardisation environment.
The copyright is enforced by national and international law. The "Berne Convention for the
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works", which is signed by 121 countries world-wide, and
other treaties apply.
Acknowledgement
The actual document has been established by the WG CT of the DLMS UA.

2. Scope
This document specifies the methods and processes for conformance testing and certification
of metering equipment implementing the DLMS/COSEM specification for meter data
exchange.
This document only focuses on testing and certifying the implementation of the
DLMS/COSEM specification. Other functional and performance tests are outside the scope of
this document.
This Edition 3 cancels and replaces Edition 2, published in 2003 and its Amendment 1,
published in 2003.

3. Introduction
3.1 Referenced documents

Ref. Reference No. Title
[1] DLMS UA 1000-1:2007, COSEM Identification System and Interface Classes “Blue Book”
Eighth Edition
[2] DLMS UA 1000-2: 2007, Sixth Architecture and Protocols “Green Book”
Edition
[3] DLMS UA 1001-1:2002, DLMS/COSEM Conformance Test Process “Yellow book”
Second edition
[4] DLMS UA 1000-1 Ed. 1, Amd. Amendment 1
1:2003
[5] DLMS UA 1001-3:2002, V2.0 Data link layer test plan, Edition 2
[6] DLMS UA 1001-3:2007, V4.1 DLMS/COSEM conformance testing – Conformance test plans - Data link
layer using HDLC protocol
[7] DLMS UA 1001-4:2002, V2.0 COSEM Application layer test plan
[8] DLMS UA 1001-4:2007, V4.1 DLMS/COSEM conformance testing - Conformance Test Plans – COSEM
Application layer
[9] DLMS UA 1001-5:2002, V2.0 Interface objects test plan
[10] DLMS UA 1001-5:2007, V4.2 DLMS/COSEM conformance testing - Conformance Test Plans – Interface
objects
[11] DLMS UA 1001-6:2005, V2.3 COSEM conformance testing – List of standardised OBIS codes
[12] DLMS UA 1001-7:2007 V1.4 COSEM conformance testing – Object definition tables
13] DLMS UA 1002:2003. First Glossary of terms
Edition
[14] X.290 (1995) OSI conformance testing methodology and framework for protocol
recommendations for IUT-T applications – General concepts
[15] X. 291 (1995) OSI conformance testing methodology and framework for protocol
recommendations for IUT-T applications – Abstract test suite specification
[16] X.293 (1995) OSI conformance testing methodology and framework for protocol
recommendations for IUT-T applications – Test realization
NOTE 1 For the actual version of the DLMS UA documents, check the DLMS UA website at http://www.dlms.com/
NOTE 2 X.290 is technically aligned with ISO/IEC 9646-1.
NOTE 3 For other relevant standards see the Bibliography.
3.2 Terms and definitions

For the purposes of this document the following definitions apply:
NOTE Most of the following definitions have been taken from ITU-T Recommendation X.290. Some definitions
have been modified to better adapt to the DLMS/COSEM conformance assessment process.

3.2.1
abnormal (test case) termination
The term used to describe the result of execution of an abstract test case when it has been
prematurely terminated by the test system. [X.290 3.3.1]
3.2.2
abstract test case
A complete and independent specification of the actions required to achieve a specific test
purpose, defined at the level of abstraction of a particular Abstract Test Method, starting in a
stable testing state and ending in a stable testing state. This specification may involve one or
more consecutive or concurrent connections.
NOTES
1 The specification should be complete in the sense that it is sufficient to enable a test verdict to be assigned
unambiguously to each potentially observable test outcome (i.e. sequence of test events).
2 The specification should be independent in the sense that it should be possible to execute the derived
executable test case in isolation from other such test cases (i.e. the specification should always include the
possibility of starting and finishing in the “idle” state).
[X.290 3.3.3]
3.2.3
abstract test case error
A test case error resulting from an error in the abstract test case. [X.290 3.3.4]
3.2.4
(abstract) test method (ATM)
The description of how an IUT is to be tested, given at an appropriate level of abstraction to
make the description independent of any particular realization of a Means of Testing, but with
enough detail to enable abstract test cases to be specified for this test method. [X.290 3.3.5]
3.2.5
abstract test suite (ATS)
A test suite composed of abstract test cases. [X.290 3.3.6]
3.2.6
abstract test suite (ATS) specification
A specification that contains a standardized ATS together with related information. [X.290
3.3.7]
3.2.7
base specification
A specification of a protocol, abstract syntax, encoding rules, or information object. [X.290
3.3.10]
3.2.8
basic interconnection test (BIT)
A test of an IUT, which has limited scope to determine whether or not there is sufficient
conformance to the relevant protocol(s) for interconnection to be possible, without trying to
perform thorough testing. [X.290 3.3.11]
3.2.9
behaviour test
A test to determine the extent to which one or more dynamic conformance requirements are
met by the IUT. [X.290 3.3.12]

3.2.10
capability (of an implementation)
A set of functions in the relevant protocol(s), which is supported by the implementation.
[X.290 3.3.13]
3.2.11
capability test
A test to verify the existence of one or more claimed capabilities of an IUT.
NOTE Capability testing involves checking all mandatory capabilities and those optional ones that are stated in
the ICS as supported, but not checking those optional ones which are stated in the ICS as not supported by the
IUT.
[X.290 3.3.14]
3.2.12
conformance assessment process
The complete process of accomplishing all conformance testing activities necessary to
assess the conformance of an implementation or a system to one or more OSI specifications.
[X.290 3.3.19]
3.2.13
conformance log
A human-readable record of information produced as a result of a test campaign, which is
sufficient to record the observed test outcomes and verify the assignment of test results
(including test verdicts). [X.290 3.3.20]
3.2.14
conformance test information (CTI)
A statement made by the supplier or implementer of an IUT integrating the PICS, the PIXIT,
the information object ICS and the information object ICT into a single document.
3.2.15
(conformance) test suite
A complete set of test cases possibly combined into nested test groups, that is needed to
perform dynamic conformance testing for one or more OSI protocols.
NOTE It should cover both capability testing and behaviour testing. It may be qualified by the adjectives:
abstract or executable, as appropriate. Unless stated otherwise, an “abstract test suite” is meant.
[X.290 3.3.22]
3.2.16
conformance testing
Testing the extent to which an IUT is a conforming implementation. [X.290 3.3.23]
3.2.17
conforming implementation
An IUT, which satisfies both static and dynamic conformance requirements, consistent with
the capabilities stated in the ICS(s).
NOTE In case of DLMS/COSEM, the capabilities are partly declared in the CTI and they are partly provided by
the IUT.
[X.290 3.3.25 modified]
3.2.18
executable test case
A realization of an abstract test case. [X.290 3.3.31]
3.2.19
executable test case error
A test case error in the realization of an abstract test case. [X.290 3.3.32]

3.2.20
executable test suite (ETS)
A test suite composed of executable test cases. [X.290 3.3.33]
3.2.21
fail (verdict)
A test verdict given when the observed test outcome either demonstrates non-conformance
with respect to (at least one of) the conformance requirement(s) on which the test purpose of
the test case is focused, or contains at least one invalid test event, with respect to the
relevant specification(s). [X.290 3.3.34]
3.2.22
foreseen test outcome
An observed test outcome identified in the abstract test case. [X.290 3.3.35]
NOTE A foreseen test outcome may include an unidentified test event.
3.2.23
idle testing state
A stable testing state in which there is no established connection of the relevant protocol(s)
and in which the state of the IUT is independent of any previously executed test cases.
[X.290 3.3.38]
3.2.24
implementation conformance statement (ICS)
A statement made by the supplier of an implementation or system claimed to conform to a
given specification, stating which capabilities have been implemented. The ICS can take
several forms: protocol ICS, profile ICS, profile specific ICS, and information object ICS.
[X.290 3.3.39]
3.2.25
implementation extra information for testing (IXIT)
A statement made by a supplier or implementer of an IUT which contains or references all of
the information (in addition to that given in the ICS) related to the IUT and its testing
environment, which will enable the test laboratory to run an appropriate test suite against the
IUT. An IXIT can take several forms: protocol IXIT, profile IXIT, profile specific IXIT, and
information object IXIT. [X.290 3.3.41 modified]
3.2.26
implementation under test (IUT)
An implementation of one or more OSI protocols in an adjacent user/provider relationship,
being that part of a real open system which is to be studied by testing. [X.290 3.3.43]
3.2.27
inapplicable test
A test case, which cannot be performed because the necessary conditions are not available.
3.2.28
inconclusive (verdict)
A test verdict given when the observed test outcome is such that neither a pass nor a fail
verdict can be given. [X.290 3.3.44]
3.2.29
information object implementation conformance statement; information object ICS
An ICS for an implementation or system claimed to conform to a given information object
specification. [X.290 3.3.45]

3.2.30
information object implementation extra information for testing; information object IXIT
An IXIT for an implementation or system claimed to conform to a given information object
specification. [X.290 3.3.46]
3.2.31
initial testing state
The testing state in which a test body starts.
NOTE This may be either a stable testing state or a transient state.
[X.290 3.3.47]
3.2.32
inopportune test event
A test event which occurs when not allowed to do so by the relevant specification(s) to which
conformance is being tested. [X.290 3.3.48]
3.2.33
invalid test event
A test event that violates at least one conformance requirement of the relevant
specification(s) to which conformance is being tested. [X.290 3.3.49]
3.2.34
means of testing (MOT) (IUTs)
The combination of equipment and procedures that can perform the derivation, selection,
parameterization and execution of test cases, in conformance with a reference standardized
ATS, and can produce a conformance log. [X.290 3.3.54]
3.2.35
negative test
Test to verify the correct response of the IUT on:
• DLMS/COSEM conformant information and services, which are not implemented;
• non conformant communication traffic.
3.2.36
(observed) test outcome
The sequence of test events, together with associated data and/or parameter values, which
occurred during test execution of a specific parameterized executable test case. [X.290
3.3.58]
3.2.37
parameterized executable test case
An executable test case, in which all appropriate parameters have been supplied with values
in accordance with specific ICS(s) and IXIT(s), as appropriate, and corresponding to a
parameterized abstract test case. [X.290 3.3.61]
3.2.38
pass (verdict)
A test verdict given when the observed test outcome gives evidence of conformance to the
conformance requirement(s) on which the test purpose of the test case is focused, and when
no invalid test event has been detected. [X.290 3.3.63]
3.2.39
positive test
test to ensure the correct implementation of the capabilities of the IUT as defined by the
supplier. A positive test has a described and defined response.

3.2.40
preliminary result
Information to be recorded in the conformance log and to be used in determining the test
verdict. [X.290 3.3.65]
3.2.41
protocol conformance test report (PCTR)
A document produced at the end of a conformance assessment process, giving the details of
the testing carried out using a particular ATS. It lists all of the abstract test cases and
identifies those for which corresponding executable test cases were run, together with the
verdicts assigned. [X.290 3.3.79]
3.2.42
protocol implementation conformance statement (PICS)
An ICS for an implementation or system claimed to conform to a given protocol specification.
[X.290 3.3.80]
3.2.43
protocol implementation extra information for testing (PIXIT)
An IXIT related to testing for conformance to a given protocol specification. [X.290 3.3.81]
3.2.44
reference (standardized) abstract test suite; reference (standardized) ATS
The standardized ATS for which a Means of Testing is realized. [X.290 3.3.84]
3.2.45
repeatability (of results)
Characteristic of a test case, such that repeated executions on the same IUT under the same
conditions lead to the same test verdict, and by extension a characteristic of a test suite.
[X.290 3.3.86]
3.2.46
semantically invalid test event
A test event which is neither inopportune nor syntactically invalid, but which contains a
semantic error with respect to the relevant protocol specification (e.g. a PDU containing a
parameter value outside the negotiated range for that parameter). [X.290 3.3.90]
3.2.47
stable testing state
A testing state which can be maintained, without prescribed Lower Tester behaviour,
sufficiently long to span the gap between one test case and the next in a test campaign.
[X.290 3.3.93]
3.2.48
standardized abstract test suite; standardized ATS
An ATS specified within an ITU-T or ISO/IEC published specification or, in the absence of
such a specification, within a publicly available specification which is in the process of being
standardized within ITU-T or ISO/IEC, and which has the highest standardization status
available, and which has the status of at least a Committee Draft or equivalent. [X.290 3.3.94]
3.2.48
static conformance review
A review of the extent to which the static conformance requirements are claimed to be
supported by the IUT. [X.290 3.3.96 modified]

3.2.49
syntactically invalid test event
A test event which is not allowed syntactically by the relevant specification(s) to which
conformance is claimed. [X.290 3.3.99]
3.2.50
test body
The sequences of test events that achieve the test purpose. [X.290 3.3.105]
3.2.50
test campaign
The process of executing the Parameterized Executable Test Suite for a particular IUT and
producing the conformance log. [X.290 3.3.106]
3.2.50
test case
An abstract or executable test case.
NOTE In general the use of the word “test” will imply its normal English meaning. Sometimes it may be used as
an abbreviation for abstract test case or executable test case. The context should make the meaning clear.
[X.290 3.3.107 modified]
3.2.51
test case error
The term used to describe the result of execution of a test case when an error is detected in
the test case itself. [X.290 3.3.108]
3.2.52
test event
An indivisible unit of test specification at the level of abstraction of the specification (e.g.
sending or receiving a single PDU). [X.290 3.3.110]
3.2.53
test group
A named set of related test cases. [X.290 3.3.111]
3.2.54
test group objective
A prose description of the common objective which the test purposes within a specific test
group are designed to achieve. [X.290 3.3.112]
3.2.55
test laboratory
An organization that carries out conformance testing. This can be a third party, a user
organization, a telecommunications administration or recognized private operating agency, or
an identifiable part of a supplier organization. [X.290 3.3.113]
3.2.56
(test) postamble
The sequences of test events from the end of the test body up to the finishing stable testing
state(s) for the test case. [X.290 3.3.116]
3.2.57
(test) preamble
The sequences of test events from the starting stable testing state of the test case up to the
initial testing state from which the test body will start. [X.290 3.3.117]

3.2.58
test purpose
A prose description of a well defined objective of testing, focusing on a single conformance
requirement or a set of related conformance requirements as specified in the appropriate OSI
specification (e.g. verifying the support of a specific value of a specific parameter). [X.290
3.3.118]
3.2.59
test step (sub-test)
A named subdivision of a test case, constructed from test events and/or other test steps.
[X.290 3.3.122]
3.2.60
(test) verdict
A statement of “pass”, “fail” or “inconclusive”, as specified in an abstract test case,
concerning conformance of an IUT with respect to that test case when it is executed. [X.290
3.3.124]
3.2.61
unforeseen test outcome
An observed test outcome not specified in the abstract test case.
NOTE An unforeseen test outcome can only lead to a test case error or an abnormal test case termination.
[X.290 3.3.127]
3.2.62
valid test event
A test event which is allowed by the protocol specification, being both syntactically and
semantically correct, and occurring when allowed to do so by the protocol specification.
[X.290 3.3.130]
3.3 Abbreviations
Abbreviation Explanation
AA Application Association
AARE Application Association Response
AARQ Application Association ReQuest
ACSE Application Control Service Element
AL Application layer
ANSI American National Standards Institute
APDU Application Protocol Data Unit
ASE Application Service Element
ATS Abstract Test Suite
A-XDR Adapted Extended Data Representation
base_name The short_name corresponding to the first attribute (“logical_name”) of a
COSEM object
CHAP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol
Class_id Interface class identification code
COSEM Companion Specification for Energy Metering
COSEMobject An instance of an interface class
CTI Conformance Test Information

CtoS Client to Server challenge

CTT Conformance Test Tool
DHCP Dynamic Host Control Protocol
DLMS Distribution Line Message Specification
DNS Domain Name Server
EAP Extensible Authentication Protocol
ETS Executable Test Suite
GMT Greenwich Mean Time
GPS Global Positioning System
HLS High Level Security
IANA Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
IC Interface Class
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IETF Internet Engineering Task Force
IP Internet Protocol
ISO International Organization for Standardization
ITU International Telecommunication Union
IUT Implementation under test
IPCP Internet Protocol Control Protocol
LCP Link Control Protocol
LLS Low Level Security
LN Logical Name
LSB Least Significant Bit
m mandatory, used in conjunction with attribute and method definitions
MD5 Message Digest Algorithm 5
MSB Most Significant Bit
NDM Normal Disconnected Mode (HDLC)
NRM Normal Response Mode (HDLC)
o optional, used in conjunction with attribute and method definitions
OBIS OBject Identification System
PAP Password Authentication Protocol
PDU Protocol Data Unit
PICS Protocol Implementation Conformance Statement
PIXIT Protocol Implementation eXtra Information for Testing
PLMN Public Land Mobile Network
PPP Point-to-Point Protocol
PSTN Public Switched Telephone Network
ROHC Robust Header Compression
SAP Service Access Point
SHA-1 Secure Hash Algorithm
SMS Short Message Service
SMTP Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
SN Short Name

StoC Server to Client Challenge

UTC Universal Time Co-ordinated

4. Conformance testing - overview
4.1 OSI conformance testing

The concept and methodology of OSI Conformance testing is described in the IUT-T X.290
Recommendation [14].
The objective of conformance testing is to establish whether the Implementation Under Test
(IUT) conforms to the relevant specification(s).
Practical limitations make it impossible to be exhaustive, and economic considerations may

restrict testing still further.
The primary purpose of conformance testing is to increase the probability that different
implementations are able to interwork. While conformance is a necessary condition, it is not
on its own a sufficient condition to guarantee interworking capability. Even if two
implementations conform to the same protocol specification, they may fail to interwork fully.
What conformance testing does do is give confidence that an implementation has the
required capabilities and that its behaviour conforms consistently in representative instances
of communication.
4.2 DLMS/COSEM conformance testing

The DLMS/COSEM specification, as a global standard for data exchange with utility metering
equipment, includes standardised conformance tests to ensure that suppliers comply with
applicable requirements. It is based on the principles developed for OSI conformance testing.
The main elements of the DLMS/COSEM specification are the following:
• the Blue Book, specifying COSEM interface object model, see [1];
• the Green Book, specifying communication profiles, see [2]; and
• the Yellow book – this document – specifying the conformance testing process.
NOTE The contents of the Blue Book and the Green Book are internationally standardized, see the Bibliography.
The DLMS/COSEM conformance testing process comprises the following:
• the conformance test plans;

• the Conformance Test Tool (CTT);
• the conformance assessment process;
• the certification process;
• the quality program.
It is illustrated on Figure 1.

DLMS/COSEM
specification
DLMS/COSEM
DLMS UA Test parameters:
test plans -
WG Maintenance from CTI and IUT
Abstract Test Suites
DLMS/COSEM CTT -
DLMS/COSEM CTT -
Parametrized Executable
Executable Test Suites
Test Suites
Conformance assessment
Comments, questions Test report
Yes
Defects ? Correct defects
No
Certificate
Figure 1 – DLMS/COSEM conformance testing process
The conformance test plans - Abstract Test Suites (ATS) - describe, at the level of
abstraction, the test to be performed. See clause 5.
The Conformance Test Tool (CTT) implements the Abstract Test Suites in the form of
Executable Test Suites. See clause 6.
The conformance assessment process consists of the phases of preparation for testing, test
operations and conformance test report production. See clause 7.
The certification process consists of examining conformance test reports and publication of
Certificates. See clause 8.
The quality program includes handling comments and questions and initiating the
maintenance of the specification, the conformance test plans and/ or the CTT as appropriate.
See clause 9.

4.3 Main features of DLMS/COSEM conformance testing

The main features of the DLMS/COSEM conformance testing process are summarized below:
• it covers servers implementing the COSEM interface object model and one or more DLMS based
communication profiles;
• it is limited to the server’s functionality as presented at the communication interface. Other
functions of the server are out of the Scope of conformance testing;
• the conformance test plans and the CTT are provided by the DLMS UA. They are available to all
members of the DLMS UA;
• the CTT can be used for self-testing and third party testing, at the conditions published at the
homepage of the DLMS UA, at www.dlms.com;
• the certification process can be initiated by any member of the DLMS UA;
• to obtain a Certificate, the manufacturer of the IUT shall possess a registered three-letter
manufacturer ID; see http://dlms.com/flag/index.htm;
• the CTT automatically generates the documents necessary for the Certification;
• the Certification is issued by the DLMS UA;
• the DLMS UA operates a Quality program to maintain the test plans and the CTT.

5. The conformance test plans
5.1 Scope of testing

The communication model of DLMS/COSEM servers to be tested is shown in Figure 2.
COSEM Interface object model
Messaging
3-layer, connection-oriented, HDLC TCP-UDP/IP based communication
based communication profile profile
COSEM Application layer
ACSE xDLMS
Transporting
Transporting
COSEM transport layer

(TCP-UDP based)
Network layer (IPv4)
Data link layer, HDLC based Data link layer
Physical layer Physical layer
Figure 2 – DLMS/COSEM interface object model and communication profiles
The COSEM Interface object model, specified in [1] and the COSEM Application layer
specified in Clause 9 of [2] are used in all implementations.
The selection of lower layers depends on the communication profile:
• in the 3-layer, connection-oriented, HDLC based communication profile, the COSEM Application
layer is supported by the data link layer using HDLC protocol, specified in Clause 8 of [2] and the
physical layer specified in clause 5 of [2];

• in the TCP-UDP/IP based communication profile the COSEM Application layer is supported by the
COSEM transport layer specified in clause 7 of [2], and this is supported by a set of lower layers
appropriate for the communication media.
The conformance test plans covers:
• the COSEM Interface objects;

• the COSEM Application layer;
• the data link layer using HDLC protocol.
All other protocol layers are implicitly tested.
5.2 Device testing

A single device is conformance tested against a single test source.
For the purposes of testing, the IUT is considered as a black box. The test consists of
sending messages to the IUT and observing the responses.
As access to layer boundaries is not available, the interface object model and the protocol
stack are tested in combination. Therefore, the following assumptions are made:
• for testing the data link layer using HDLC protocol, it is assumed that the physical layer works
correctly;
• for testing the COSEM Application layer, it is assumed that the supporting layers work correctly;
• for testing the COSEM Interface object model, it is assumed that the protocol stack works
correctly.
5.3 Structure of the conformance test plans

Each test plan comprises an abstract test suite (ATS).
NOTE The remaining part of clause 5.3 and clause 5.4 applies strictly to the protocol layer test plans only.
Test suites have a hierarchical structure (see Figure 3) in which an important level is the test
case.
Each test case has a specified test purpose, such as that of verifying that the IUT has a
certain required capability (e.g. the ability to support certain packet sizes) or exhibit a certain
required behaviour (e.g. behave as required when a particular event occurs in a particular
state).
Within a test suite, nested test groups are used to provide a logical ordering of the test
cases.
Associated with each test group is a test group objective.
Test cases may be modularised by using named subdivisions called subtests.
Test events are indivisible units of specification within a test step (e.g. the transfer of a single
PDU to or from the IUT).

Test suite
Test group Test group Test group Test group
Test case Test case Test case
Test step Test step Test step
Test event Test event Test event
Figure 3 – Test suite structure
Test suites include test cases falling in the following categories (the list is not exhaustive):
• capability tests;
• behaviour tests of valid behaviour (positive tests);
• behaviour tests of syntactically invalid or inopportune behaviour (negative tests);
• test focusing on PDUs sent to and received from the IUT;
• test related to each protocol phase;
• timing;
• PDU encoding variations;
• variations in values of individual parameters and/or combination of parameters.
5.4 Abstract test cases

An abstract test case is derived from a test purpose and from the relevant specifications. An
abstract test case:
• has a Test case name, used as a reference and relating the test case to the test group and the
test suite;
• gives the References pointing to the relevant clauses of the Blue Book [1] and/or the Green Book
[2], constituting the base specification, the test case is related to and derived from;
• specifies the Test purpose;
• specifies the expected behaviour of the IUT; this comprises the Expected result;
• specifies, if the initial testing state required by the test body is not the desired starting stable state
of the test case, the sequence of events to put the IUT to the initial testing state for the test body;
this test sequence comprises the Preamble;
• specifies the sequences of foreseen test events necessary in order to achieve the test purpose.
These sequences comprise the Test body. It may consist of one or more subtests;

• specifies, if the test body can end without the IUT being returned to the desired stable testing
state, the sequence of events to return the IUT to the desired stable testing state; this test
sequence comprises the Postamble;
• specifies the verdict to be assigned to each foreseen test outcome.
The abstract test cases are formatted using the template shown in Table 1.
Table 1 – Template for test cases

Test case
References
Test purpose
Expected result
Preamble
Test body
Postamble
Comments
5.5 Test outcomes and verdicts

The test outcome is the series of events, which occurred during execution of a test case.
A foreseen test outcome is one, which has been defined by the abstract test case i.e. the
events which occurred during execution of the test case matched a sequence of test events
defined in the abstract test case. A foreseen test outcome always results in the assignment of
a test verdict to the test case.
The test verdict will be PASSED, FAILED or INCONCLUSIVE:
• PASSED – Means that the observed test outcome gives evidence of conformance to the
conformance requirement(s) on which the test purpose of the test case is focused, and is valid
with respect to the relevant specification(s);
• FAILED – Means that the observed test outcome either demonstrates non-conformance with
respect to (at least one of) the conformance requirement(s) on which the test purpose of the test
case is focused, or contains at least one invalid test event, with respect to the relevant
specification(s);
• INCONCLUSIVE – Means that the observed test outcome is such that neither a pass nor a fail
verdict can be given.
An unforeseen test outcome is one, which has not been identified by the abstract test case,
i.e. the events, which occurred during execution of the test case did not match any sequence
of test events defined in the abstract test case. An unforeseen test outcome always results in
the recording of a test case error or an abnormal test case termination for the test case.
A test case error is recorded if an error is detected either in the abstract test case itself, (i.e.
an abstract test case error) or in its realization, (i.e. an executable test case error).
An abnormal test case termination is recorded if the execution of the test case is prematurely
terminated by the test system for reasons other than test case error.
The results of executing the relevant individual test cases will be recorded in the
conformance test report.

5.6 Conformance test plan for the Data link layer using
HDLC protocol
5.6.1 Version 2.0

This conformance test plan is specified in [5]. It is implemented in the Conformance Test Tool
V1.x.
5.6.2 Version 4.1

This conformance test plan is specified in [6]. Its structure is shown on Figure 4. It is
implemented in Conformance Test Tool V2.
Test suite
Data link layer
using HDLC protocol
Test group Test group Test group Test group Test group
HDLC_FRAME HDLC_ADDRESS HDLC_NDM2NRM HDLC_INFO HDLC_NDMOP
Test group Test group Test group

HDLC_ HDLC_ HDLC_
HDLC_ HDLC_ HDLC_ HDLC_ HDLC_
ADDRESS_ ADDRESS_ NDM2NRM
FRAME_P FRAME_N INFO_P INFO_N NDMOP_N
P N _P
Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases
Figure 4 – Structure of the conformance test plan for the Data link layer using HDLC protocol
5.7 Conformance test plan for the COSEM application

layer
5.7.1 Version 2.0

V1.x.
5.7.2 Version 4.1


Test suite
COSEM Application layer
APPL_IDLE APPL_OPEN APPL_DATA_LN APPL_DATA_SN APPL_REL
Test group Test group Test group

Test group Test group
APPL_ APPL_ APPL_
APPL_ APPL_
DATA_LN_ DATA_LN_ DATA_SN_
IDLE_P REL_N
P N N
Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases Test cases
Figure 5 – Structure of the conformance test plan for the COSEM Application layer
5.8 Conformance test plan for COSEM interface objects
5.8.1 Version 2.0
V1.x.
5.8.2 Version 4.2

Test suite
COSEM interface objects
COSEM_X_Y
Multiple references
Mandatory objects
Figure 6 – Structure of the conformance test plan for the COSEM interface objects

6. The DLMS/COSEM conformance test tool
6.1 Introduction
The DLMS/COSEM conformance test tool (CTT) is an implementation of the abstract test
suites (ATS) in the form of executable test suites (ETS). It can perform the following:
• the selection of test cases;

• the parametrization of the test cases;
• the execution of test cases; and
• the production of the Conformance test report and a Conformance log.
The CTT therefore is a Means of testing (MOT) as defined in 3.2.32.
more details, see complete Yellow Book …
6.2 Licensing the CTT

The CTT can be licensed with or without the log module, by any member of the DLMS UA
from Euro DCS: http://www.eurodcs.de. The conditions are published at the homepage of the
DLMS UA, at www.dlms.com.

7. The conformance assessment process
7.1 Overview
The conformance assessment process is the complete process of accomplishing all
conformance testing activities necessary to enable the conformance of the IUT to be
assessed.
It may be performed by an identifiable part of a manufacturer’s organization (self-testing), a

user or an independent test house (third party testing).
An overview of the conformance assessment process is given in Figure 7.
Start
Preparation for testing:

IUT & CTT
Test operations
Test selection and

CTI
parametrization
Test campaigns:
one for each communication
profile and application
context
Conformance test report &

log
End
Figure 7 – Conformance assessment process overview

The preparation for testing phase involves:
• the preparation of the IUT;

• the production of the CTI file;
• the preparation of the CTT.
The test operations include:
• review of the CTI;

• test selection and parameterization;
• one or more “test campaigns”.
At the end of each test campaign, a conformance test report is produced.
In the following, the elements of the conformance test process are described and the use of
the CTT is explained.
7.2 Preparation for testing
7.2.1 Preparation of the IUT

The IUT shall be prepared for testing with a configuration representative for the intended
application and a sufficient amount of data so that all the tests can be performed.
The following provides a guideline:
• if the IUT supports more than one logical device, then at least two logical devices should be
configured;
• if it is claimed that the IUT supports more than one authentication context, then at least one AA
should be present for each authentication context. These can be in the same logical device or
spread across the logical devices;
• if the purpose of the conformance assessment process is to obtain a Certificate, then the
mandatory Management Logical Device shall be present and shall contain a Public AA;
• instances of each standard interface class supported shall be present. The set of interface objects
available should be representative for the intended application;
• the AAs shall provide access to the objects and attributes to be tested, with appropriate access
rights and authentication;
• it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to restrict access rights to attributes, which must not be
modified during the test. This can be done by providing extra information in the CTI;
• if load profile with selective access are to be tested, then a sufficient amount of data should be
present. The conditions are specified in [10];
• the set of xDLMS services should be representative for the intended application.
See also Clause 8.5, Scope and validity of the certification.
7.2.2 Production of the CTI

To evaluate the conformance of an IUT, it is necessary to have a statement on the
capabilities and options, which have been implemented in the IUT, so that it can be tested
against relevant requirements, and against those requirements only. Such a statement is
known as an Implementation Conformance Statement (ICS).
It also necessary to have information relating to the IUT and its testing environment, like
addresses, timeouts, baud rates, passwords. This information is known as Implementation
Extra Information for testing (IXIT).

The Conformance Test Information (CTI) file, in addition to the identification of the
manufacturer and the IUT, includes the ICS and the IXIT. It can be prepared using the
template provided by the CTT. The template can be loaded from the View menu. A Help,
explaining the contents and the syntax of the CTI is provided. The CTI editor has a built in
syntax checker.
7.3 Test operations
7.3.1 Review of the CTI

Before the testing is started, the CTI file shall be reviewed:
• it shall be checked, if the necessary informative declarations are present;

• it shall be checked if the conformance statements are present and coherent;
• it shall be checked if the mandatory extra information elements are present.
7.3.2 Test selection and parameterization

The test suites and test cases to be performed can be selected as shown in the complete
Yellow Book. If the purpose of the test campaign is to obtain a Certificate, then all COSEM
object tests “ALL COSEM” and all application layer tests “ALL APPL” shall be selected. If the
IUT uses the 3-layer, connection-oriented, HDLC based communication profile, the all Data
link layer tests shall be selected as well.
Based on the information taken from the IUT and the CTI, the CTT executes only the tests
applicable and the test cases are automatically parameterized.
7.3.3 Test campaigns

If the IUT supports more than one communication profile, then a test campaign is needed for
each communication profile for which compliance is claimed.
If the IUT supports more than one communication interfaces, then a test campaign may be
run on each interface.
If the IUT supports more than one application context, then a test campaign is needed for
each application context for which compliance is claimed.
From the View menu, the line traffic shall be selected, and then the test campaign shall be
started from the Run menu. If necessary, the test can be stopped using Abort.
The progress of the test can be followed on the Conformance test report, Conformance log
and Line traffic windows.
It may happen, that during the test campaign, an exception occurs, terminating the test.
The possible causes and measures are explained in the Help menu.

7.4 Documents generated by the CTT
7.4.1 Conformance test report

The conformance test report is automatically generated during each test campaign. It is a
digitally signed text file, containing the following elements.
• date of testing;
• identification of the test tool and license owner;
• identification of the manufacturer as declared in the CTI file;
• identification of the IUT as declared in the CTI file;
• a summary of results for each test suite;
• the result of each test case;
• a copy of the CTI file;
• a digital signature, allowing to check the authenticity of the conformance test report.
7.4.2 Conformance log

The following Figures show the screen with basic logging, with HDLC logging enabled and
with both HDLC and APDU logging enabled.
7.4.3 Line traffic

The line traffic window can be opened from the View menu. As the test progresses, it shows
the telegrams sent to (in green) and the received from (in red) the IUT. It can be copied to a
text file for further analysis.
7.4.4 Viewing the conformance test plans

To help analysing the results, the conformance test plans and the test scripts can be viewed
from the CTT.
The test plans can be opened from the View menu.

7.4.5 Viewing the test scripts

Similarly, the test scripts can be opened from the View menu. Alternatively, they can be
opened from either the Test report or the Test log window. To do this, a test case name has
to be selected, and then clicking right opens a contextual menu.
7.4.6 The “Create snapshot” feature

In the Help menu, a Create snapshot function is available. When activated, the contents of
the conformance test report, conformance log and line traffic windows, together with the CTI
file are saved in a single zip file.
This feature is useful if an exception occurs during the test.
7.4.7 The “Create certification report” feature

At the end of a successful test campaign, the conformance test report, conformance log and
line traffic window, together with the CTI file can be packaged into a single zip file using the
Create Certification report feature.
7.5 Repeatability of results

In order to achieve the objective of credible conformance testing, it is clear that the result of
executing a test case on an IUT should be the same whenever it is performed. Experience
shows that it may not be possible to execute a complete conformance test suite and
observed test outcomes which are identical to those obtained on another occasion.
Nevertheless, at the test case level, every effort has been made to minimize the possibility
that a test case produces different test outcomes on different occasions.
7.6 Requirements for test laboratories

Conformance assessment may be performed by a vendor, a user or a third party.
If the test is done by the vendor – which is the preferred method - the test laboratory shall be an
identifiable part of the vendor’s organisation.

8. The certification process
8.1 General
The purpose of the certification process is to obtain a “DLMS/COSEM compliant” Certificate.
This clause describes the necessary steps.
8.2 Initiation of the certification process

The certification process may be initiated by any member of the DLMS UA.
The manufacturer of the device to be certified shall be also a member of the DLMS UA and
shall possess a three-letter manufacturer ID.
8.3 Submission of conformance test documents

The test results for each communication profile and application context for a given type shall
be submitted to the DLMS UA at info@dlms.com.
The DLMS UA verifies the contents and the authenticity of the conformance test report(s).
The documents submitted are used as supporting documentation for the Certificate.
The DLMS UA maintains the right to discuss the contents of the conformance test report with
the organization having initiated the certification process.
8.4 The certification

A Certificate may be issued only if the test specimen passed all applicable tests. The
Certificate contains the following elements, taken from the conformance test report as
applicable:
• a unique ID of the Certificate;

• the identification of the IUT;
• the identification of the manufacturer;
• the identification of the test tool version and the license owner;
• the version of the COSEM Object definitions file used for testing;
• the communication profile(s) used for testing;
• the communication interface(s) used for testing;
• the application context(s) used for testing;
• the date of testing and the digital signature of each conformance test report submitted;
• an indication that the Certificate is only valid for the functions successfully tested;
• an indication that the test is executed on one specimen of the product and that the test results
may not be applicable for other test specimens;
• any remarks added by the DLMS UA, as seen fit;
• date of issue and signature.

The template of the Certificate is included as Annex A.
Information on the configuration and functions tested is available in the test report.
The DLMS UA publishes the Certificate on its website at www.dlms.com.
The Certificate entitles the manufacturer to place the “DLMS/COSEM compliant mark” on its
products and documentation.
The test results are filed, but not published.
8.5 Scope and validity of the certification

The DLMS/COSEM Certificate certifies, that the IUT as identified by the manufacturer / test
house passed the tests applicable for the given configuration.
The supporting evidence is the conformance test report with the conformance log and line
traffic.
DLMS/COSEM compliance cannot be claimed to any feature not tested.
The DLMS UA does not control if the meters manufactured are identical to the meter tested.
The Certification remains valid as long as the manufacturer guarantees that no design or
manufacturing changes in communication hard- and software with essential influence on the
implementation have been made to the certified device. If changes have been made, a re-test
is necessary.
The DLMS UA takes no position concerning the validity of the guarantee mentioned above.
8.6 Disclaimer
The DLMS UA takes all possible effort to ensure that the conformance test plans and the
conformance test tool are line with the DLMS/COSEM specification and provide a reasonable
depth of testing.
The Certificate does not mean however that an absolute proof of conformance is given.
8.7 Reproduction of conformance tests by the DLMS UA

If required either by the manufacturer, a user or a third party tester, the DLMS UA will
reproduce, at agreed conditions, the test using a test specimen made available and
reproducing the test conditions as far as possible.

9. The quality program
9.1 General
An important element of the DLMS/COSEM conformance testing process is the quality
program. It includes:
• validation of the conformance test plans and the CTT;

• the assistance provided to users;
• maintenance.
9.2 Validation of the conformance test plans and the CTT

The validation of the conformance test plans and the CTT has been done in several steps:
1. the test plans have been written by experts from different manufacturers – members of
the DLMS UA WG Maintenance – based on the Blue Book [1] and the Green Book [2];
2. all test scripts, implementing the abstract test cases have been validated by running them
against several implementations.
9.3 Assistance provided to users

The DLMS UA, upon request, provides assistance to the users of the tool. For this purpose,
test results can be sent to the DLMS UA: info@dlms.com.
9.4 Maintenance
The DLMS UA maintains the conformance testing process to eliminate problems with the tool found
during testing, to enhance tests and to accommodate changes in the standards.
The procedure is the following:
1. a proposal, together with a justification is made to add or modify a test. This can be
initiated by any member of the DLMS UA or by the DLMS UA itself;
2. the request is investigated by the DLMS UA;
3. if the request is accepted, the conformance test plans are amended by the DLMS UA;
4. the new tests cases are implemented by the tool developer;
5. the new tests cases are validated by the DLMS UA;
6. the amended conformance test plans are published;
7. a new version of the CTT is made available to the licensed tool users.
This process is supported by the DLMS UA website.
In the following, the process is illustrated by use cases.

9.5 Use cases

9.5.1 Use case 1 – introducing a new standard OBIS code
A vendor needs a new standard OBIS code to support a new functionality in the metering
equipment.
The proposal is submitted to the DLMS UA. The DLMS UA checks if the proposal is in line
with the standards. If approved, the COSEM Object definition tables [12] are amended and a
new .dat file is made available for download.
9.5.2 Use case 2 – modification of an existing test

If it is found that despite of careful validation, any conformance test is not fully compliant with
the standard, or it is necessary to enhance a test, then a proposal may be submitted to the
DLMS UA by the vendor or the user and the process described above is followed.
9.5.3 Use case 3 – adding a test for a new standard feature

A vendor implements a feature described in the DLMS/COSEM specification, but which is not
yet covered in the CTT.
The vendor submits the proposed test plan to the DLMS UA and the process described above
is followed.
9.5.4 Use case 4 – revision of the specification

The DLMS UA initiates a revision or amendment of the DLMS/COSEM specification (e.g.
introducing a new protocol stack).
The conformance requirements and the test plans are prepared together with the standard,
but at least upon the acceptance of the new standard.
The DLMS UA initiates the maintenance of the tool.

Annex A
Certificate template


Dlms Yellow Book PDF

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dlms Yellow Book PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dlms Yellow Book PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TECHNICAL REPORT

DLMS User Association

Reference number: EXCERPT FROM DLMS UA 1001-1:2007, Third Edition

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 2/35

8.2 Initiation of the certification process...................................................................................... 31

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 3/35

© Copyright 1997–2007 DLMS User Association.

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 4/35

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 5/35

3.1 Referenced documents

3.2 Terms and definitions

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 6/35

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 7/35

[X.290 3.3.25 modified]

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 8/35

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 9/35

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 10/35

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 11/35

[X.290 3.3.107 modified]

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 12/35

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 13/35

CtoS Client to Server challenge

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 14/35

StoC Server to Client Challenge

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 15/35

4. Conformance testing - overview

4.1 OSI conformance testing

Practical limitations make it impossible to be exhaustive, and economic considerations may

4.2 DLMS/COSEM conformance testing

The main elements of the DLMS/COSEM specification are the following:

The DLMS/COSEM conformance testing process comprises the following:

• the conformance test plans;

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 16/35

Comments, questions Test report

Figure 1 – DLMS/COSEM conformance testing process

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 17/35

4.3 Main features of DLMS/COSEM conformance testing

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 18/35

5. The conformance test plans

5.1 Scope of testing

COSEM Interface object model

COSEM Application layer

COSEM transport layer

Network layer (IPv4)

Data link layer, HDLC based Data link layer

Physical layer Physical layer

Figure 2 – DLMS/COSEM interface object model and communication profiles

The selection of lower layers depends on the communication profile:

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 19/35

• the COSEM Interface objects;

5.2 Device testing

5.3 Structure of the conformance test plans

Associated with each test group is a test group objective.

Test cases may be modularised by using named subdivisions called subtests.

DLMS User Association EXCERPT DLMS UA 1001-1 ed.3 20/35

Test group Test group Test group Test group

Test case Test case Test case