BERR WAN Comms Requirements 0 2

Smart Metering WAN Communications
Requirements
Author(s) Alastair Manson

Document Draft
Status
Document Ref. WAN COMMS RQTS
No.
Document 0_2
Version
Date Issued 14 July 2008
WAN Communications Version 0_2
Table of Contents
Table of Contents............................................................................................. 2
Document Control ............................................................................................ 3
1.1 Version History .................................................................................. 3
1.2 Related Documents ........................................................................... 3
1.3 Intellectual Property Rights and Copyright......................................... 3
1.4 Disclaimer.......................................................................................... 3
2 Executive Summary and Introduction ....................................................... 4
2.1 Executive Summary........................................................................... 4
2.2 Purpose ............................................................................................. 4
2.3 Scope ................................................................................................ 5
2.4 Objective............................................................................................ 6
2.5 Future Development .......................................................................... 6
3 Glossary & Conventions ........................................................................... 7
3.1 Document Conventions & Assumptions............................................. 7
3.1.1 Conventions for Diagrams .......................................................... 7
3.1.2 Market Segments ....................................................................... 7
3.1.3 Meter Functionality ..................................................................... 7
3.1.4 Meter Location............................................................................ 8
3.1.5 Meter and Metering System........................................................ 8
3.1.6 Communications for Each Fuel................................................. 10
3.1.7 Two Types of Communication for Smart Metering?.................. 10
3.2 Glossary .......................................................................................... 12
3.3 Assumptions .................................................................................... 15
4 Approach and Scope .............................................................................. 16
4.1 Approach ......................................................................................... 16
4.2 Actors .............................................................................................. 16
4.3 Scope of solution ............................................................................. 18
5 General Requirements............................................................................ 20
6 Requirements of Actors .......................................................................... 23
6.1 Supplier ........................................................................................... 23
6.2 Consumer ........................................................................................ 27
6.3 Network / Distributer Use ................................................................. 28
6.4 3rd party service provider ................................................................. 29
6.5 Microgeneration............................................................................... 29
6.6 Appliances ....................................................................................... 30
6.7 Display............................................................................................. 30
6.8 Installer / Maintainer ........................................................................ 30
7 Traffic Flow Description .......................................................................... 30
Page 2 of 32 30-Jul-08
Document Control
1.1 Version History
Version Date Author Description
0_1 14 July 2008 Alastair Manson Initial draft
0_2 24 July 2008 Alastair Manson Updated following
BERR’s WAN
communications
workshop 22 July 2008.
1.2 Related Documents

Document Title Version Author Date
Smart Metering Operational Framework, V1 ERA SRSM August
proposals and options Project 2008
WAN Communications Options ERA SRSM July
Definition Project for BERR 2008
1.3 Intellectual Property Rights

Rights and Copyright
All rights including copyright in this document or the information contained in it
are owned by the Energy Retail Association and its members. All copyright
and other notices contained in the original material must be retained on any
copy that you make. All other use is prohibited. All other rights of the Energy
Retail Association and its members are reserved.
1.4 Disclaimer
This document presents the Requirements of WAN communications for smart
metering in Great Britain for discussion. It does not represent a final statement
of requirements. We have used reasonable endeavours to ensure the
accuracy of the contents of the document but offer no warranties (express or
implied) in respect of its accuracy or that the proposals or options will work. To
the extent permitted by law, the Energy Retail Association and its members do
not accept liability for any loss which may arise from reliance upon information
contained in this document. This document is presented for information
purposes only and none of the information, proposals and options presented
herein constitutes an offer.
2 Executive Summary and Introduction

2.1 Executive Summary
This document is a product of the Wide Area Network (WAN) Communications
workstream, part of the wider project undertaken by BERR to consider smart
metering.
The Project Initiation Document for this workstream stated that “A better
description of the communications options and their requirements will enable
the impact on market models for each option to be better understood, e.g.
constraints, drivers, issues, risks.”
This document collates the general requirements of smart metering WAN

communications along with the requirements of key parties that will use or
interact with the smart metering WAN communications. The approach has
been to consider the requirements of suppliers and then to look at other
parties in turn for whether they have additional requirements or can refine
those of the supplier.
A number of parties need to exchange data with smart meters and devices
local to those meters. There are requirements for access to that data
exchange to be controlled and secure and for standards of service to be
agreed. Parties other than suppliers will generally have similar requirements
of WAN communications but may in some cases require greater performance.
Parties that install and maintain components of the smart metering system will
have requirements that differ from those who purely use the communications.
Consumers will have additional requirements that smart metering WAN

communications have no detrimental effect on them.
The key purpose is to help progress toward a common understanding and to

facilitate discussion between parties interested in the use of smart metering in
GB.
2.2 Purpose
This document describes requirements of the WAN communications for smart
metering in Britain. Its key purpose is to help progress toward a common
understanding and to facilitate discussion between parties interested in the
use of smart metering in GB.
By their nature, the WAN communications requirements tend to be non

functional as the WAN communications are a service which allows the
functional requirements of smart metering to be delivered.
Many of these non functional requirements cannot be specified precisely now.
It is not abnormal when purchasing rather than building complex solutions that
the options need to be weighed up against cost for how well they deliver or
constrain the requirements.
Premature specification is undesirable in any case as it is likely to create false

constraints.
This paper collects the WAN communications requirements into a single

document. The consolidated statement of requirements is to be used as the
basis for discussion and is expected to be refined in future work.
The objective is to promote a broad common level of understanding rather

than to nail down a technical specification. This document avoids using
technical jargon as these are requirements that need to be understandable to
a wide range of stakeholders.
2.3 Scope
The scope of this document consists of the requirements for two way
communications between smart gas and electricity meters and authorised
parties in Great Britain and the requirements of those parties that may be
affected by those WAN communications. This includes where the
communications may be for the ultimate purpose of communicating with
another device local to the meter.
The diagram below shows the SRSM view of the scope of smart metering, and
the place of WAN Communications within that scope:
Industry Interfaces
Data Transport
(internet)
Figure 1: Smart Metering Scope
This document does not address the communications options ‘upsteam’ of the
data gateway, as these, to a large extent, will be dependent upon the market
model approaches. It does not address local communications but it does
reflect requirements
It is noted that the requirements and available options are likely to flex over
time as technology and commercial arrangements adapt to what is essentially
a new GB market for metering communications. This document does not
consider the commercial or contracting arrangements or implications for the
provision of smart metering communications services.
2.4 Objective
The objectives of the WAN Communications workstream as part of the wider
BERR activities have been agreed as follows::
“The objective of the WAN Communications workstream of work is to deliver a

better understanding of the WAN Communications options and their potential
impact on market models to feed into Phase 2 evaluation of market models.
A better description of the communications options and their requirements will
enable the impact on market models for each option to be better understood,
e.g. constraints, drivers, issues, risks.
What are the practical implications of operating different communications
options within the different market models? This is a question that can be
started in Phase 1, but will have to be answered in more detail in Phase 2.
The output from this workstream will feed into the market model evaluation
planned for Phase 2.
A key objective of this workstream is to bring all stakeholders to a common
level of understanding.”
2.5 Future Development

It is expected that the requirements expressed in this document will be refined
as parties other than suppliers express their expectation of using smart
metering capabilities.
The requirements will be influenced by the actual capabilities of solutions and

this may introduce constraints.
3 Glossary & Conventions

3.1 Document Conventions & Assumptions
The ERA SRSM project has been running since September 2006, and has
established a number of practical conventions and assumptions with regard to
smart metering.
The project published Proposals and Options for a Smart Metering

Operational Framework in August 2007 – this document is over 300 pages in
length and presents comprehensive proposals to meet the practicalities of
operating smart metering in a competitive retail environment.
The following subsections give a brief overview of a number of these topics.

For a more complete summary of the Smart Metering Operational Framework,
please visit http://www.energy-retail.org.uk/smartmeters
Throughout this document materials from specific service providers or existing

implementations are used. This is to illustrate the concepts or context under
consideration, and in no way advocates these approaches and products as
preferred solutions or applications. The use of such illustrations is simply to
meet a key objective of establishing a common understanding of the options
to support further discussion.
3.1.1 Conventions for Diagrams

Alongside the conventions listed below, the following standard approaches
have been used within diagrams.
• Wired physical connections are shown using a solid line
• Wireless physical connections are shown using a dotted line
All diagrams within this document are illustrative of the subject under
consideration and are not intended to represent technical, architectural or
schematic depictions of actual situations.
3.1.2 Market Segments

The Operational Framework has been written to address the requirements of
energy Suppliers in the domestic retail markets. However, it recognises that
meters used in homes can actually be exactly the same as meters used in
businesses, and therefore the Operational Framework proposals could apply.
Therefore, within this document, the communications options discussed could

be suitable for use in both domestic and equivalent non-domestic markets.
3.1.3 Meter Functionality

The degree of ‘smartness’ of a smart meter is something that distinguishes
most of the metering products available today, or that are being installed as
part of smart metering projects overseas.
The SRSM project has agreed, and discussed with meter manufacturers and
the wider energy stakeholders, a set of functional requirements for gas and
electricity smart meters. These requirements do not represent final proposals

and are presented here to give context to the WAN Communications
discussions.
• 2 Way Communications – WAN and Local (see below)

• Interval measurement and storage of consumption data
• Support for flexible and configurable energy tariffs
• Interoperable data exchange and protocols
• Remote connection/disconnection1
• Support for prepayment/pay as you go operation (subject to the
footnote above)
• Support for microgeneration
• Provision of consumption information
• Remote configuration of tariffs, meter operations, upgradeable
firmware etc.
3.1.4 Meter Location

Throughout, this document refers mainly to the ‘Home’ and uses illustrations
of houses to represent locations for meter points. However, smart meters and
the communications solution options listed here could apply equally to other
domestic and non-domestic premises types.
Figure 2: Smart Meter Locations
The ERA Smart Metering Operational Framework documentation specifies

‘domestic-sized’ metering, and such meters could be installed in any type of
property where energy consumption is within the load/capacity capability of
such meters.
The Operational Framework includes a number of Meter Variants, usually to

accommodate specific energy supply requirements of a metering point – e.g.
polyphase electricity supply or a semi concealed gas meter location (see
definition of Meter Variant below).
It is also the case that the placement and location of meters as shown in
diagrams is illustrative.
3.1.5 Meter and Metering System

Throughout this document, references to a smart meter, particularly within
diagrams, should not be interpreted as referring only to smart meters where all
1
For electricity, the inclusion of a switch/breaker/contactor has been agreed for all meters.
The inclusion of similar, valve-based functionality for all gas meters remains subject to cost.
of the functionality is contained within one ‘box’. There is regular use of a

picture of an electricity smart meter to represent smart Metering Systems.
Smart Metering Systems – Illustration of Flexible Approaches
+ + +
Software
+ +
Smart Metering Metering System Illustration of how fuels could share
Metering System
Systems, with all using a separate (with suitable commercial
using a separate
the functionality, ‘black box’ and arrangements) a single set of black
‘black box’ (or
including external antenna box(es) to deliver functionality
boxes) to deliver
communications to deliver
functionality
“under the glass” functionality
In all cases, the metrology functions must be delivered by a regulated measuring instrument.
The required functionality could be delivered by components:

- within the meter casing;
- through the use of one or more new hardware components (in conjunction with new meters
or retrofitted to existing); or
- external hardware components shared between fuels.
Generally, no component of the smart Metering System will be reliant upon equipment
owned by the customer (e.g. broadband router), or services under the control of the
customer (e.g. telephony provider). There may be individual circumstances where use of the
customers equipment is unavoidable (customer chooses to own the meter, or particularly
within a non-domestic context where additional energy supply contractual terms can be
applied).
Figure 3: Smart Metering Systems, Illustration of Flexible Approaches
As defined below, a smart metering system could comprise a number of

physical devices (external modems, antennas etc.) to deliver the smart
functionality requirements.
The potential variety of physical locations and conditions of metering points

could result in smart metering systems where components are not located
together in the same metering cupboard, or on the same metering board. It
would not be practical to illustrate or explain these potential variations within
this document.
Therefore all general references to smart meters and uses of icons to

represent smart meters in this document should be inferred as meaning the
defined Metering System.
3.1.6 Communications for Each Fuel

There are a number of potential approaches to delivering WAN infrastructures
to both gas and electricity metering. As discussed above, this may involve
additional communications equipment.
Shown below are the two basic approaches – autonomy and the ‘piggy-back’,
both of which are equally valid when considering WAN communications
options. Some of the options presented naturally favour one or other of these
approaches, some can be agnostic. The ‘piggy-back’ approach presents
advantages to key concerns with gas meter power consumption, but creates
interoperability, data storage and network operation challenges for electricity
meters.
In the ‘piggy-back’ option, the electricity meter is effectively part of the gas
metering system.
Figure 4 WAN Connections for Both Fuels
3.1.7 Two Types of Communication for Smart Metering?

This document specifically addresses the options for WAN communications,
i.e. from the meter to a remote party. There are requirements and
expectations of smart meters to deliver communications functionality locally,
i.e. from the meter to a home display, or microgeneration device, or a meter
from a different utility.
Page 10 of 32 30-Jul-08
LOCAL COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE
WAN COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE
WAN COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE

Data Transport
(internet)
Figure 5 Three Smart Metering Interfaces
Note that the WAN requirements cover the wider scope of the delivery of end
to end solutions rather than just the technical considerations of WAN
communications provision covered in the WAN comms options. They remain
requirements of the participants.
Industry Interfaces
Data Transport
Figure 6 Scope of BERR WAN Products
Some WAN Communications options – Power Line Carrier, Low Power Radio,
are candidates for the physical medium to deliver Local Communications.
Other WAN options – Cellular, Broadband – have been discounted for Local
Communications either on the basis of initial or ongoing cost, power
consumption and other practicalities.
Page 11 of 32 30-Jul-08
The ERA SRSM Project has been facilitating a workstream to specifically

consider the options for Local Communications for Smart Metering. This
workstream includes experts from metering and communications
organisations and is expected to deliver an evaluation and recommendation
report in September 2008. Details on this workstream are available from
http://www.srsmlocalcomms.wetpaint.com
Whilst it may seem to be the optimum approach to have one communicating

component within a smart meter, for example WAN and Local
Communications are delivered using low power radio hardware within the
meter, unless the solution option meets all of the requirements for both
applications, there may be an argument for including two communicating
components.
This has been the approach in some international examples requiring Local
Communications connectivity. However, these examples have tended to see
the Local element added after the WAN specification has been set.
3.2 Glossary
A number of these definitions are similar to those used within the Operational
Framework.
Term Meaning
Access Control The method by which the Operational Framework controls
access to smart Metering Systems, smart metering data and
associated devices.
Authorised Party Means the Supplier or another person authorised by
configuration of the Access Control security policies in the
Metering System to interrogate or configure the Metering
System.
Authorised Parties could include a communications service
provider, a meter operator, a network operator etc.
Data Exchange Electronic interactions including the transmission of data
between Metering Systems and Authorised Parties or
Metering Systems and Local Devices
DLMS Device Language Message Specification – European data
protocol for meter communications
ERA Energy Retail Association, the trade association
representing the six major energy Suppliers in Britain.
ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute –
international standards body
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers –
international standards body
Interoperability To allow a smart Metering System to be used within market
rules by the registered Supplier, its nominated agents and
parties selected by the customer without necessitating a
change of Metering System.
Security of the smart Metering System infrastructure, with
structured Access Control, is a key interoperability
requirement.
Page 12 of 32 30-Jul-08
Term Meaning
Local Communications between a Metering System and Local
Communications Devices within the premises in which the Metering System is
installed.
Local Device A Local Device can be any piece of equipment within
premises that communicates directly with the Metering
System using Local Communications.
Metering System A single device or meter, or a combination of devices used
to deliver the Lowest Common Denominator as defined in
the Operational Framework - ‘Smart Meter Functional
Specification’.
Meter Variant Classification of meter type under the Operational
Framework. A ‘Standard’ variant is suitable for installation at
the majority of meter points in Great Britain. Other variants
exist to cover specific supply, circuit or customer issues at a
site.
Examples include Polyphase, Semi-Concealed or 5
Terminal variants.
The full table of Meter Variants can be found in the ‘Smart
Meter Functional Specification’.
Meter Worker A generic Operational Framework term referring to any
person attending a metering point for the purposes of
installation, maintenance, investigation, replacement or
removal of the Metering System.
Includes existing energy industry defined roles of Meter
Operator, Meter Asset Maintainer, Meter Reader, Data
Retriever etc.
Open Standard The European Union definition of an open standard (taken
from “European Interoperability Framework for pan-
European eGovernment Services”) is:
• The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a
not-for-profit organisation, and its ongoing development
occurs on the basis of an open decision-making
procedure available to all interested parties (consensus
or majority decision etc.).
• The standard has been published and the standard
specification document is available either freely or at a
nominal charge. It must be permissible to all to copy,
distribute and use it for no fee or at a nominal fee.
• The intellectual property - i.e. patents possibly present -
of (parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available
on a royalty-free basis.
There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.
Operational Smart Metering Operational Framework Proposals and
Framework, or Options v1 – as published August 2007 by the ERA
SMOF
PSTN Public Switched Telephone Network
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, generally an
industrial control system managed by a computer.
SRSM Project Supplier Requirements of Smart Metering project.
Exercise in 2006-08 undertaken by ERA to develop the
Page 13 of 32 30-Jul-08
Term Meaning
Operational Framework.
Ongoing at the time of developing this document
Supplier Means an energy retail business
WAN (Wide Area Communications between a Metering System and a remote
Network) Authorised Party
Communications
Page 14 of 32 30-Jul-08
3.3 Assumptions
Assumptions
Whilst defining the WAN Communications options, a number of assumptions
have been used. These are presented below:
A.1. All communications options are (or will be) compliant with relevant
legislation and regulations
A.2. Smart meter functionality is broadly equivalent to the SRSM Smart
Meter Specification
A.3. WAN Communications options are defined only so far as to reach a
connection to the internet. Architectures and systems ‘upstream’, i.e.
how an energy Supplier accesses metering data, are subject to
separate consideration
A.4. WAN Communications service provision will include network
management activity suitable to that network, i.e. traffic and outage
management, scheduling, fault resolution.
A.5. Smart meters will all have unique (fixed or dynamic) network
addresses in accordance with the protocols to be used
Page 15 of 32 30-Jul-08
4 Approach and Scope

4.1 Approach
The approach to collating these requirements has been to consider the
requirements of the whole Smart metering solution for Great Britain, then to
consider the requirements from the point of view of the different parties or
devices that may use or interact with the Smart Metering WAN
communications.
The supplier requirements are considered first, as this is a party with known
expectations of using smart metering and there are established and
documented requirements of this party.
The other parties have then been considered in turn for whether they have
additional requirements or can elaborate on those of the suppliers.
4.2 Actors
The Smart Metering WAN communications requirements are those of parties
that will use this communication or who may be affected by it.
In use case methodology the term actor is used to describe parties, people or
systems that interact with a system. An actor is a type of party that interacts
with a system there may any number of instances of that party.
The following actors have been considered as having key interaction with
smart metering and therefore being likely to set requirements of the WAN
communications:
• Consumer
• Remote parties
o Supplier
o Network operator
o 3rd party service
• Local Devices
o Home appliances
o Display
o Microgeneration
• Installer / maintenance
• General or industry requirements
The relationship of actors with the WAN communications is illustrated in the

following diagram
Page 16 of 32 30-Jul-08
Microgeneration Appliances
Supplier
Meter
WAN Communications
Network
Display 3rd party service provider
Communications Installer and Maintenance

General
Consumer
Figure 7 Context of Actors and WAN Comms
The consumer
consumer
The consumer may interact with the meter or local devices in activities that
result in WAN data exchange, they may also be affected by the WAN
communications, the facilities that smart metering will enable are often for the
benefit of the consumer.
Remote parties
These include:
• All Suppliers – The supplier for each meter changes over time when
consumers switch
• Network operators – this may be fixed for any one meter
• 3rd party service providers – This is a category that covers a number of
services that may be chosen by the customer such as energy
management services, the supplier such as meter data processing or
another party such as DNO or GT.
These parties may exchange data with meters including data that may
determine the behaviour of devices local to the meter or exchange data
with devices local to the meters via meters to local devices.
All parties must be suitably authorised. There is a need for rules to

determine who the parties may be, what abilities they are allowed and how
their access is controlled.
Local Devices
Page 17 of 32 30-Jul-08
These are devices local to the meter, normally in the same premises. These
devices may also have some relationship to a remote party. These devices
are expected to include a means of displaying energy use information but may
also include:
• Appliances
• Microgeneration facilities
but may over time include a host of other devices including potentially water
metering.
Local devices may have a number of different communications relationships

with the metering system
Theoretically they may:
• have two way communication with the metering system
• only receive data from the metering system
• only send data to the metering system
• Communicate with another party via the metering system
General
A general actor is included. This is to allow requirements that don’t belong to
a specific participant or of those stakeholders that will not use the system
directly to be captured. This may represent for example where national or
local Government intend for policies to be realised via smart metering. This
actor may implement requirements by obligations placed on other parties.
New actors should be distinguished when clear requirements are identified.
4.3 Scope of solution

The whole solution must provide the WAN communications between the meter
population and remote authorised parties, including where those
communications are used for the purpose of data exchange between local
devices.
Remote parties
These are parties with suitable authorisation who will use the WAN
communications for data exchange with the meter or via the meter to other
devices. The number of authorised parties is not known, for each metering
system the authorised parties will include a succession of suppliers (or
agents acting on their behalf), it may include industry parties and agents
chosen by the supplier or consumer.
The meter population

• This is primarily the population of domestic Gas and Electricity meters
in GB. It is anticipated however, that the same arrangements may be
used for business premises. This is a population of approximately 47
million meters.
Local devices
• There will be an unknown number of devices local to the meter that can
use local communications to communicate with the meter or via the
meter to remote parties. These devices are expected to include an in
home display and may include a number of other devices.
Page 18 of 32 30-Jul-08
Note: meters may be considered a local device to another meter; this

could be multiple meters for the same utility in the same premises or
meters for another utility. For example a gas meter (or water meter)
may have no WAN communications capability of its own and rely on the
electricity meter to provide its WAN communications. These devices
are normally in the same premises as the meter although the local
communications mechanism may be used to provide communication to
data concentrators outside the premises.
Page 19 of 32 30-Jul-08
5 General Requirements
Requirements
This section reflects the requirements of the whole smart metering solution for
Great Britain rather than those of a specific participant type.
Ref Requirement Details

WG1 The WAN communication solution must
provide for data exchange between suitably
authorised parties and gas and electricity
metering systems of domestic size in the GB
population.
There may be a number of parties

contemporaneously authorised to exchange
data with each metering system.
WG2 The WAN communication solution must

provide for data exchange between suitably
authorised parties and devices local to the gas
and electricity metering systems in the GB
population via those metering systems.
WG3 Access Control It is noted that a solution
It is essential that all interaction with each could have nodes
smart metering system via WAN passing on information
Communications be restricted to those with packets without the need
suitable rights to do so. The access control to read those packets
mechanism must manage::
• Who can interact with each metering
system using WAN communications
(including where this is done to interact
with local devices) at any point in time,
• What functions a party is allowed to use
and
• What data a party may read, write or
delete.
This mechanism must exclude access to those

without suitable rights including where rights
have expired.
WG4 Interoperability Interoperability will need

There will be a number of different parties to be defined including
authorised to communicate with each any which layers of the OSI 7
metering system over time, this change of layer model are
authorised party must be able to be effected included. It is accepted
without the need to visit the metering system. that this will need to be
done but would be
premature to define this
currently.
Page 20 of 32 30-Jul-08

WG5 Utility robust
Any technology option that has the potential for
customer interference or a dependency on a
customer provided service is not a robust utility
solution. It is essential to have a high reliability
solution for a service that is the responsibility
of the utility service provider, not the customer.
Utilities could not be dependent on a level of
service for communications determined by, or
driven for, the customer. It is likely that utilities
would have to consider additional commercial
arrangements to meet “utility-robust” standards
of service.
There is not a requirement for communications
to be continuously “on” but there is likely to be
a requirement for very high availability.
WG6 Geographic coverage It is acknowledged that

The WAN communications solution must the WAN
provide coverage for the whole of the GB area. communications may not
The WAN communications solution must be delivered by a single
provide coverage for close to 100% of property solution or network
types and topographical variations. nationally or in local
areas but the overall
coverage must be close
to 100%, failure is only
acceptable in truly
exceptional
circumstances.
WG7 Premise type coverage It is acknowledged that

The WAN communications solution must the WAN
provide coverage for close to 100% of property communications may not
types and topographical variations. be delivered by a single
solution or network for all
property types but the
overall coverage must
be close to 100%, failure
is only acceptable in
truly exceptional
circumstances.
WG8 Longevity It is envisaged that smart

There is a requirement that the WAN solution metering is a new
has a life span of “a generation of meters”. generation of meters, the
WAN communications
are an essential part of
smart metering and
should last that
generation. This does
not mean that the
Page 21 of 32 30-Jul-08

mechanisms cannot
change in that time but
would not be acceptable
for this new generation
of meters to need
replacement because
the Communications
becomes obsolete.
The solution may be

designed such that
should a component part
of the WAN
communications become
obsolete, it can be
updated without the
replacement of metering
systems.
There would be a
requirement for new
communications
solutions to be
backwardly compatible
with existing meters
without the need to visit
those meters for
upgrade.
WG9 Growth of Use

The requirements for use of the WAN
communications are expected to grow over
time hence there is a requirement for the
solutions to have spare capacity and or
scalability.
WG10 Reasonable cost

The whole solution must be provided at
reasonable cost, this is true of the WAN
Communications element.
WG11 Initiation of Communication
WAN communications may be initiated by
remote parties or by the metering system (or
by devices local to the metering system).
WG12 Energy Efficiency Note References to be
The metering system as a whole is required to added
be energy efficient. The WAN solution must
be energy efficient in its use and manufacture.
Page 22 of 32 30-Jul-08
6 Requirements of Actors
6.1 Supplier
It is stressed that the metering system is a utilities solution. Although it is
expected that the WAN communications will be used by other parties, the
supplier to customer relationship provided by metering communications is
essential and must not be compromised by other use.
Suppliers expect to carry out activities with the meter including the following:
• Meter reading
• Meter configuration eg Tariff setting
• Alerts
• Credit updates
• Access control
• Meter data retrieval
• Software/firmware upgrade
Additionally, suppliers may expect to update information to a display that is

local to the metering system.
The suppliers’ requirements for smart metering WAN communications are

collated in a specific schedule of the SMOF (reference 1), this section extracts
those requirements (note the requirements reference use of TCP/IP and XML
however these solutions are proposals rather than completely fixed
requirements).
Ref Requirement Mandatory/

Highly
Desirable/
Desirable
WS1 The communications solution(s) will be compliant with M
Page 23 of 32 30-Jul-08

Highly
Desirable/
Desirable
relevant legislation and regulations.
WS2 There is a requirement for intermittent2 2 way M

communication of data between the Metering System
and Authorised Parties.
The communications ability of the metering system may
create expectations of very short latency and these
requirements will need to be established. For example,
there may be a desire for customer service advisors to
interrogate the meter during a phone call with the
customer, this would create requirements for latency to
be in the range of one minute.
WS3 The communications solution(s) will support a minimum M

standard of service3 for the completion of all Data
Exchanges between Metering Systems and Authorised
Parties4.
This standard of service will be expressed in time. It will
not be prescriptive about the number of retries required –
all Data Exchanges will complete.5
WS4 The communications solution(s) will support a HD

prioritised6 standard of service for the completion of
2 There is no requirement for continuous communication between a Metering System and

Authorised Parties, e.g. always online. The communications solution should support
intermittent (as opposed to continuous) service available on demand. This of course, does
not, preclude that the requirement could be fulfilled by continuous service availability, subject
to cost and the potential impact on battery life of gas meters.
The limiting factor would be those components of the WAN communications that are battery
powered, namely the gas meters. Sending and receiving messages or “listening” (being
available to receive) takes power hence the overall requirement is for intermittent
communications.
It is expected that the majority of the communications solution will be available virtually
constantly, but that gas meters particularly may have communications regimes that use power
economically.
3
Any introduction of a standard of services introduces parallel requirements for Operational
Framework participants for unilateral or multilateral monitoring of performance against the
standard. Whilst this may be vested in the service provider(s) themselves, some form of
oversight will be required to review communications service delivery and address any
problems.
4
Where a Metering System solution includes a dependency on local communications
hardware to complete a Data Exchange between a Metering System and an Authorised Party,
the local communications will be required to support the overall standard of service required
for WAN communications.
5
Due to the potential differences in technologies used to meet the communications
requirements, a simple standard of service requirement is stated. Traditional communications
resilience measures of Mean Time to Failure, Latency etc might not apply to each of the
solutions options listed below. Communications service procurement exercises could address
any technology specific service requirements.
Page 24 of 32 30-Jul-08

Highly
Desirable/
Desirable
Data Exchanges between Metering Systems and
Authorised Parties.
Priorities within the standard of service will be
expressed in the time taken to complete the Data
Exchange – suggested example
Highest Priority = where timeliness of completing Data
Exchange is critical to completion of a business process
– e.g. adding emergency credit to Metering System or
alerting an Authorised Party of a serious fault/tamper.
Standard Priority = assumed to be most common
classification used for the majority of Data Exchanges.
Low Priority = information is not critical to Supplier or
customer process – e.g. downloading new software
version to Metering System.
It is possible that such prioritisation may not be needed

for some time but it is considered essential to make
provision for this to be able to be activated later.
WS5 The communications solution(s) will require the number HD

of site visits to a Metering System to address issues or
failures of the communications solution(s) to be kept to a
minimum.
WS6 All communications between a Metering System and M

Authorised Party will be secure.7
If communications security does not form part of the
communications protocols, the solution will include
security measures and controls as follows8:
Cryptosecurity – e.g. at least 128 bit encryption using
Advanced Encryption Standard (AES).
Emission security – protecting information emanating
from the Metering System from intercept and
analysis
Physical security – safeguarding communications
equipment, materials and documents from access to
or observation of by unauthorised persons
6
A number of communications solutions can physically only offer a flat standard of service,
therefore the requirement for prioritised Data Exchanges is split into a separate requirement.
7
Communications and data security, alongside communications technology, is subject to
ongoing development – at all stages the communications security should be suitable.
8
Not all solutions options will be capable of all of the security requirements.
Page 25 of 32 30-Jul-08

Highly
Desirable/
Desirable
Traffic Flow security – concealing the presence and
properties of valid messages on the network
Transmission security – measures to protect
information from interception and exploitation by
means other than decryption – e.g. jamming,
frequency hopping etc.
WS7 Communication to and from a Metering System will be M

resistant to inappropriate interference by any party
including the customer.9
WS8 The communications solutions shall be resistant to M

viruses and other malicious software.
WS9 The communications solution(s) will comply with M

Schedule I Protocol Specification.
(note – this schedule specifies the use of internet
protocol as part of the TCP/IP internet protocol stack)
WS10 The communications solution(s) will comply with M

Schedule J Data Exchange Format Specification.
(note this schedule specifies the use of XML)
WS11 The communications solution will not alter, corrupt or M

permanently store any data it transports.
WS12 The communications solution(s) under reasonable M

usage profiles, will not critically affect the power
consumption10 or battery life of a Metering System.
WS13 The communications solution(s) will be capable of M

meeting the data traffic requirements of the Operational
Framework.11
9
Inappropriate here, means inadvertent or deliberate actions that would compromise the other
requirements. A balance will need to be maintained between the requirement for secure
communications with Local Devices, as defined in Schedule F Access Control Specification,
and the ability for customers to establish Local Communications between a Metering System
and a Local Device – i.e. should a customer have to call their Supplier to inform them that they
have purchased an Operational Framework compatible Washing Machine and want to be able
to show actual consumption costs on the new Local Device?
10
In accordance with Supply Licence Condition 18 - Power consumed by Metering System
components (e.g. communications black boxes) should not exceed 10 watts unless the
customer has been notified of such through their contract. NOTE this note is to be updated
with appropriate references.
11
See appendix A
Page 26 of 32 30-Jul-08
6.2 Consumer
The majority of the consumer requirements of Smart metering WAN
communications (reliable, secure communications) will be covered by the
supplier requirements). However, the consumer has requirements of the
WAN communications solution in addition to those of the supplier.
WC1 Safety
The WAN communications solution shall not be harmful to residents.
WC2 Interference caused to existing networks

The WAN communications solution shall not materially interfere with
consumers’ existing networks (as is the case for all consumer
electronics).
WC3 Minimal Disruption

The consumer has a requirement that the installation and operation of
smart metering causes minimal disruption. The requirement for
minimal disruption includes disruption to the person’s schedule such as
access to the premises or supply off during work and disruption caused
by physical device(s).
WC4 Latency in Communication

Consumers will carry out activities that use the metering system WAN
communications, where these activities involve a customer activity and
a response (update to the metering system) the consumer will normally
require the operation to complete in a short space of time.
A clear example where a short latency in messages is required is
where the meter is operating in prepayment mode. It is expected that
meters will hold the balance, credit payments may be made at a vendor
and that the credit is updated to the meter by the vendor or supplier.
The consumer will require that this operation complete in a short time.
As a guideline, it would be unlikely to be acceptable for the “smart
metering process” to take significantly longer than a “normal time” for
the current process.
The current process for a prepayment customer when they need to
update credit is that they go to a vendor, purchase credit which is held
on a key or token, return to the meter and transfer the credit to the
meter, the credit is immediately updated to the meter. This activity
might reasonably be assumed to take about 20 - 30 minutes. There is
a requirement that the “smart” equivalent process is not longer.
Smart metering may introduce new expectations that this process is
significantly faster, for instance within the time of a telephone call to
make the credit update although it must be remembered that there can
be an emergency update by local entry of a code.
WC5 Cost
Page 27 of 32 30-Jul-08
The customer has a requirement that the whole of the smart metering
system is at reasonable cost, this is true of the WAN communications
element.
WC6 Not Intrusive

The customer has a requirement that the WAN communications are not
invasive. There is a balance to be struck between providing useful
services and those that may be seen as invasive.
6.3 Network / Distributer Use

There are no firm requirements of Network operators or distributors as
yet. However the potential requirements of these parties can be
estimated by considering a range of benefits these parties may expect
to realise from use of smart metering facilities. Examples of these
benefits have been identified in the ERA response to BERR’s AMM
impact assessment as follows:
Benefits enabled with ERA specification:

• Loss Management
• Restoration verification
• Emergency response
• Load forecasting and scheduling

Benefits that would require additional functionality
• Power quality monitoring
• Phase Balancing
• Load Balancing
• Outage notification
These and others have been agreed as potential benefits for networks load
management, in particular, has been discussed as a likely use. However,
none of these requirements are firm. It is unknown if each network operator
would be likely to adopt the same set of functionality although there should be
similar benefits cases for each.
The activities to achieve the benefits that are recognised for networks would
clearly involve more data traffic. However, they are unlikely to exceed the
requirements of suppliers for access control, security and performance other
than that some of the activities may require a short latency.
The following requirements in excess of the supplier requirements are

identified and would be added subject to requirements being formalised:
Page 28 of 32 30-Jul-08
WN1 Latency of Communications

- some network requirements might need very brief latency. For example a
network using smart metering for outage or restoration management may wish
to know of these events within a few minutes.
WN2 Broadcast
Some of the activities may require the ability to send a message to groups of
metering systems. This may be true for example where there is a need to
check the status of supply in an area. Hence there may be a requirement for
the ability to send broadcast messages. This may be a requirement of other
participants including suppliers.
WN3 Prioritisation
The ability to prioritise data exchanges by type has been recognised as
desirable by suppliers. Collections of functions that could be used by
networks would be expected to contribute to the security of supply. As such,
this collection of functions might warrant the highest priority.
6.4 3rd party service provider

Although 3rd party uses of the WAN communications are anticipated, there are
no known uses. Anticipated uses such as energy management services or
appliance maintenance should not exceed supplier requirements for access
control, security and performance.
3rd party uses are expected and an amount of data traffic must be allowed for
accordingly.
It is possible that there may be 3rd party uses of smart metering WAN
communications that would have high performance requirements but any such
requirements are secondary to the utility requirements and might be taken up
suitable capacity and performance is available rather than making an
additional requirement.
6.5 Microgene
Microgeneration
The term Microgeneration is used here to represent the whole cycle of
microgeneration, from the device or devices that may be generating for the
premises to the market participants who may need to know of generation and
export to the grid.
There are participants who will need to know the amounts and times of
electricity generated or exported, there may be a need for configuration of
meters and displays to cater for the generation and export of electricity.
However, although the data is exchanged for a different purpose it is of
exactly the same nature as import data and, save for introducing additional
parties and additional traffic, there should be no requirements in addition to
those of the supplier.
Page 29 of 32 30-Jul-08
6.6 Appliances
The requirements of appliances which may communicate with 3rd parties via
the metering system WAN communications have been covered within the
requirements of suppliers and 3rd parties and no additional requirements are
identified.
6.7 Display
One or more suppliers may communicate via the metering system with one or
more in home displays. The display may be used to carry out many actions
that are, by default, actions that “belong” to the meter.
Authorised parties may carry out dialogues with the consumer using the
display rather than the meter as the interface. However the requirements of
the supplier should already cover this interface and no additional requirements
are identified.
6.8 Installer
Installer / Maintainer
The parties responsible for installing and maintaining the metering systems
have a different relationship with the WAN communications the other actors in
that they are not using the WAN communications for their own sake.
As the relationship is different installers have requirements in addition to those
of suppliers. This party requires:
WI1 Repeatable processes

Installation of metering systems, including the commissioning of WAN
communications, and maintenance activities must be simple and routine
activities.
WI2 Avoidance of meter visits through remote diagnostics

The vast majority of current reasons for meter visits must be avoided as
this avoidance is a major benefit in the case for smart metering. Metering
systems should provide information about faults automatically and should
also report maintenance requirements (such as low batteries) so that
meter visits can be targeted when needed. It is particularly important that
the state of the metering systems can be sufficiently assured that the
current need for inspection visits can be avoided.
7 Traffic Flow Description

The intended use of metering system and local devices will drive the capacity
requirements of the WAN communications.
Data traffic analysis will be vital. Assessment of traffic will be possible by

identifying information such as the following:
• Type of activity
• Size of messages in exchange
• Size of overhead in messages
Page 30 of 32 30-Jul-08
• Number of meters involved

• Frequency
• Profile of use
The concurrent use and topology will drive the ‘size’ of the bandwidth
requirements.
However, it is premature to undertake detailed data traffic analysis. There are

enough unknowns such analysis has limited value and may actually be
misleading.
A number of parties are expected to use the WAN communications for data
exchange with the metering system and local devices but the party with known
requirements is the supplier. Each additional party would add to the data
traffic requirements but the extent would depend on their interaction with the
metering system. It is reasonable to assume that the use may grow
significantly over time.
The vast majority of messages in a supplier’s data exchanges are likely to be

reasonably small (such as meter readings, logs, tariff updates, credit updates,
alerts, etc) it would be possible to estimate these although this less likely to be
the area that will stretch the solution.
The majority of messages of other parties are likely to be similarly small

although until those uses are identified this is speculative – different parties
may have completely different use profiles.
The largest messages are likely to be software or firmware upgrades although

it is impossible to estimate the size of these when the software solution is
unknown. The software development will need to account for constraints of
the need to provide upgrade over the WAN.
An early example of how traffic analysis may look is provided in Appendix A.

It is stressed though that all values given are estimates that would need to be
re-evaluated with experts in all the relevant fields.
Page 31 of 32 30-Jul-08
APPENDIX A: EXAMPLE Traffic Flow Analysis Model
1 The table below shows an example of traffic flow that could be modelled to meet Operational Framework requirements.
2 Due to the incremental nature of any implementation of smart metering, and the potential variety of data requirements by customer or Supplier segments, any model will
need to use a number of assumptions and profiles to determine the traffic capacity requirements of smart metering.
3 All sizes used in this table are in bytes and are estimations.
Message Overhead Fuel Message Content

Example Usage
Interaction Header Footer Network Gas Elec Elements Size Total Per Frequency % of Portfolio
Ack Meter of Activity
Meter Reading (non- 100B 100B 15B Yes Yes 10B per reading and 40B 255B Daily 100%
interval, simple tariff) register identifier
Meter Reading (interval 100B 100B 15B Yes Yes 10B per half hour 240B 455B Daily 100%
data) advance
Tariff Setting 100B 100B 15B Yes Yes 50B per tariff set 100B 315B Monthly 25%
Meter alerts 100B 100B 15B Yes Yes 20B per alert 20B 235B Daily 5%
Debit balances 100B 100B 15B Yes Yes 50B per balance – 200B 415B Weekly 20%
debt, credit, recovery
rate, emergency credit
Access Control Policies 100B 100B 15B Yes Yes 250B per policy 250B 465B Monthly 50%
Software application 100B 100B 15B Yes Yes 15000B per 15000B 15215B Monthly 10%
application

BERR WAN Comms Requirements 0 2

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

BERR WAN Comms Requirements 0 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Smart Metering WAN Communications

Author(s) Alastair Manson

1.2 Related Documents

1.3 Intellectual Property Rights

2 Executive Summary and Introduction

This document collates the general requirements of smart metering WAN

Consumers will have additional requirements that smart metering WAN

The key purpose is to help progress toward a common understanding and to

By their nature, the WAN communications requirements tend to be non

Many of these non functional requirements cannot be specified precisely now.

Premature specification is undesirable in any case as it is likely to create false

This paper collects the WAN communications requirements into a single

The objective is to promote a broad common level of understanding rather

Figure 1: Smart Metering Scope

“The objective of the WAN Communications workstream of work is to deliver a

2.5 Future Development

The requirements will be influenced by the actual capabilities of solutions and

3 Glossary & Conventions

The project published Proposals and Options for a Smart Metering

The following subsections give a brief overview of a number of these topics.

Throughout this document materials from specific service providers or existing

3.1.1 Conventions for Diagrams

3.1.2 Market Segments

Therefore, within this document, the communications options discussed could

3.1.3 Meter Functionality

electricity smart meters. These requirements do not represent final proposals

• 2 Way Communications – WAN and Local (see below)

3.1.4 Meter Location

Figure 2: Smart Meter Locations

The ERA Smart Metering Operational Framework documentation specifies

The Operational Framework includes a number of Meter Variants, usually to

3.1.5 Meter and Metering System

of the functionality is contained within one ‘box’. There is regular use of a

Smart Metering Systems – Illustration of Flexible Approaches

The required functionality could be delivered by components:

As defined below, a smart metering system could comprise a number of

The potential variety of physical locations and conditions of metering points

Therefore all general references to smart meters and uses of icons to

3.1.6 Communications for Each Fuel

Figure 4 WAN Connections for Both Fuels

3.1.7 Two Types of Communication for Smart Metering?

LOCAL COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE

WAN COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE

WAN COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE

Figure 6 Scope of BERR WAN Products

The ERA SRSM Project has been facilitating a workstream to specifically

Whilst it may seem to be the optimum approach to have one communicating

4 Approach and Scope

The relationship of actors with the WAN communications is illustrated in the

Display 3rd party service provider

Communications Installer and Maintenance

All parties must be suitably authorised. There is a need for rules to

Local devices may have a number of different communications relationships

4.3 Scope of solution

The meter population

Note: meters may be considered a local device to another meter; this

Ref Requirement Details

There may be a number of parties

WG2 The WAN communication solution must

This mechanism must exclude access to those

WG4 Interoperability Interoperability will need

Ref Requirement Details

WG6 Geographic coverage It is acknowledged that