Issues #6796

sSrv2 and sSrv3 ordering of the MMS identifiers

Added by Goran Pregrad 19 days ago. Updated 5 days ago.

Due date:
Discuss in Upcoming Meeting:
Clause Reference:
61850 Standard:
Triggering Tissue:
Final Decision:
Initial Test Document:
Updated Test Document:
Test Case ID:
Closed Reason:
Test Procedure Update
Triggering Tissue 2:
Triggering Tissue 3:


In tests sSrv2 and sSrv3 client requests DUT to return ordered list of "logical nodes" and "data". Return results should be ordered lists of MMS Identifiers. Question that is being raised is what is definition of ordering for returned elements?

In 8-1 we have following specification:

MMS Identifier should be of type BasicIdentifier, however that type does not exist in ISO 9506-2 version 2003 that is referenced. That type is from previous 1999 version of MMS standard. In current valid version it is defined in 7.5.2:

In IEC 61850 8-1 (Ed2Amd1 only one with explicit declaration) CBB char is not used, so based on that Identifier should be of type VisibleString. This VisibleString is same as in 1999 version BasicIdentifier.

Now in ISO 9506-1 there is sentence below in blue:

Base on it I would think that if UTF-8 is used than it is using its ASCII alike ordering. And if VisibleString is used than ordering per 7.5.2 should be used.
Difference would be following:
List = “Aa”, “AH”, “1A”
OrderedListUTF8 = “1A”, “AH”, “Aa”
OrderedListVisibleString = “Aa”, “AH”, “1A”

We found different vendors implementing different ordering rules. In my opinion ordering should be done per provided order of characters in VisibleString of Identifiers. Would you agree?
Additionally, I think 8-1 reference of BasicIdentifier should be changed to Identifier:VisibleString.


MMSIdentifier.png View MMSIdentifier.png 187 KB Goran Pregrad, 05/28/2024 04:18 AM
CollatingSequences.png View CollatingSequences.png 23 KB Goran Pregrad, 05/28/2024 04:20 AM
CharacterSets.png View CharacterSets.png 33.2 KB Goran Pregrad, 05/28/2024 04:23 AM
Solution to redmine 6796.docx Solution to redmine 6796.docx 21.7 KB Goran Pregrad, 06/11/2024 08:15 AM

Updated by IEC 61850 TPWG 19 days ago

  • Due date set to 06/11/2024
  • Status changed from New to In Progress
  • Assignee set to Goran Pregrad

A server has to have a specific method of ordering, but that method is not standardized.

Remove "order" from the test procedure.


Updated by IEC 61850 TPWG 5 days ago

  • Due date changed from 06/11/2024 to 07/09/2024

Updated by Goran Pregrad 5 days ago

Proposed solution is attached.


Updated by IEC 61850 TPWG 5 days ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved

Updated by Richard Schimmel 5 days ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to Closed
  • Closed Reason Test Procedure Update added
  • Closed Reason deleted (--Not Set---)

Also available in: Atom PDF