Architecture and Communication of an Electric
Vehicle Virtual Power Plant
Bernhard Jansen, Carl Binding, Olle Sundstrom, and Dieter Gantenbein
IBM Research - Zurich, 8803 Ruschlikon, Switzerland
AbstractThis paper outlines an architectue of an electric
vehicle (EV) based vehicle-to-grid (V2G) integrating virtual
power plant (VPP). The overall system architecture, a sketch
of the trip-prediction algorithm, and the associated optimization
problem are provided. The communication requirements for our
proposed architecture are derived, with emphasis on its reliabil-
ity, responsiveness, security, and application-level behaviour. We
propose extensive use of well-known, standardized, communica-
tion protocols between EVs and the centralized VPP to transmit
status and trip information from EVs to the VPP as well as to
control the charging process.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The ongoing depletion of oil reserves and concerns of
climate changes due to fossile fuels used by combustion
engines have sparked renewed interest in the potential use of
electric vehicles (EVs).
If a fleet of EVs can be managed appropriately, a large share
of such vehicles can also become an asset for an electric power
grid: electrical load can be shifted in time, and excessive EV
battery energy could be fed back into the electrical grid. This
concept is known as vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technology. For
example, in grids with high degrees of fluctuating, renewable
power sources, such as wind or photovoltaics, the demand
response potential of an EV fleet can be exploited to enhance
grid stability. When the supply of energy is low, EV battery
charging may be delayed or stopped. Conversely, when energy
is abundant, charging is resumed or takes place at a higher
pace.
To manage the integration of a fleet of EVs into the
electrical grid, intelligence is needed to optimize and control
the charging of EV batteries. In particular, the following issues
must be addressed by an EV aggregator (in this paper referred
to as Electric Vehicle Virtual Power Plant (EV-VPP)):
Deliver sufficient energy to vehicles: When EVs are
connected to the grid, enough energy must reach the
vehicles to guarantee appropriate levels of charge for the
next trip or for the trips of a pre-determined planning
period, for example, the next day.
Minimize the cost of charging: Fluctuating energy re-
sources may imply variable electricity prices in the future.
It will thus be of interest to the consumer and also to
the EV-VPP to minimize the cost of charging while still
achieving the necessary energy levels for the next set of
trips.
Respect and avoid grid constraints: Considering a large
number of EVs localized in a distribution grid, there
may be a considerable load on the distribution grid for
long periods. Depending on the strength of the grid, in
particular most of the distribution grids, bottlenecks must
be considered and handled appropriately.
The EV-VPP thus needs to mediate between the energy
suppliers (generation) and consumers (loads, in particular EV
charging). Based on usage predictions, the charging behaviour
of EVs can be anticipated, optimized, and aligned with fore-
casts of fluctuating energy production.
Traditional VPPs are investigated in [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6].
However, the aggregation of EVs differs from the aggregation
of more traditional power resources in terms of
Power volume: Depending on the grid characteristics,
EVs may consume from 3 KW upward when charging.
This can be put into relation with the typical wind-turbine
generation power of 1.5 to 3 MW.
Temporal availability of EVs: The predictability of when
EVs are connected to the electrical grid is a challenge.
The usage patterns, whilst probably typical for certain
cases, may be difficult to predict and exhibit large vari-
ations. Hence, the accurate prediction when EVs will be
hooked into the grid may be limited.
Spatial distribution of EVs: For possible grid congestion
planning and management, the temporal availability of
EVs as grid resources must be augmented with location
information when EVs are connected to the electrical
grid. for possible grid congestion planning and manage-
ment.
Our focus here is on the communication requirements to
gather data from EVs, the power grid, energy generators, and
other grid resources as well as to communicate with EVs for
control purposes. In particular, in a geographically distributed
environment, this represents a challenge to achieve reliability,
acceptable response times, and sufficient throughput - all at
reasonable cost.
Related Work
The potential economic impact of larger-scale V2G inte-
gration has been analyzed by Kempton et al. in [7]. The
economics presented there become even more relevant in grids
with high amounts of wind energy as described in [8], [9],
taking into considerations the economics of balancing power
required for highly intermittent energy sources. An evaluation
of the V2G economics for Sweden and Germany can be found
in [10]. Motivation of our work in context of the EDISON
project is found in [11].
 The impact of EV fleets on grids were investigated as early
as 1983 with a study on the timing of EV recharging and its
effect on utilities [12].
Rahman et al. [13] have anticipated the implications of EVs
on power distribution grids. They point to distribution grid
implications of large EV fleets, new load peaks in time slots
of previously weak demand, and the effects of long charging
cycles of batteries; see also [14].
Koyanagi et al. [15] propose time-shifted fast charge at
lunch and night time to avoid peak loads during already
heavily loaded time intervals. A summary energy usage model
for EVs is used.
To have an EV fleet enter the balancing power market,
a large number of such loads has to be aggregated and
managed [16]. Without maintaining per-customer information,
the EVs are controlled using technical constraints and per-EV
objectives. Price dependability is based on a personal, per-EV
value factor, which increases towards the time of departure at
which a certain level of energy has to be reached. The EV
managers optimization scheme is based on simplified mecha-
nism design theory, maximizing the per-EV utility value under
price dependency constraints, power and grid constraints, as
well as untruthfully reported per-PHEV utility values.
Waraich et al. [18] describe a simulation environment to
study various EV charging schemes. The authors distinguish
dumb, dual tariff, and smart charging. Details on potential low-
voltage distribution grid impacts are given in [19], whereas in
[20] the impact of a fleet of EVs on the Vermont power grid
is studied.
DiAdamo et al. [17] motivates the use of SIP, also in combi-
nation with IEC 61850, for reliability, scalability and security
in Smartgrids. As well as for the reuse of infrastructure.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Sec-
tion II describes our overall system architecture and the various
subsystems. Section III gives details on our trip-forecasting
approach and how charging schedules for individual EVs
are established. The communication requirements, based on
commonly accepted standards, are discussed in Section V.
Finally, Section VI concludes this paper with an outlook on
potential system deployments.
II. S YSTEM A RCHITECTURE
The EV-VPP acting as the EV aggregator can be seen as a
modularly composed piece of software. Each subsystem has
a dedicated purpose and is integrated into an overall working
system.
The core modules in the EV-VPP architecture are
Data storage: The VPP needs to gather considerable
amounts of data to perform its EV-fleet management
tasks. In particular, historical trip data is needed to predict
future EV usage. In addition, end customer information
may need to be stored, as well as billing information.
Static grid data can either be replicated within the VPP
or is fetched on demand from remote sources; the same
applies for production prediction (e.g., weather forecast
for wind or solar power). Grid status information must be
Trip forecasting
Data model
and storage CRM
Optimizer
Billing/clearing
End users
Communication modules
EV status Grid state Generation data
Figure 1. VPP modular architecture.
obtained in real time from the utilities SCADA1 systems;
data formatting and protocols for this, however, would
exceed the scope of this paper.
It is assumed that the feed into the data storage is set up
as a set of independant tasks, based either on periodic
pulling or asynchronous push from the data sources. For
planning and optimization purposes, trip information and
EV status changes are communicated to the VPP.
Trip forecasting: This module provides the forecasting of
the anticipated energy requirements for EV usage. As de-
scribed in Section III, the VPP has to estimate how much
energy has to be fed into an EV while it is connected to
the power grid. The connection location also plays a role
when handling potential grid congestions. This module
evidently depends on the data storage subsystems.
Trip forecasting must also be linked into the customer
relationship subsystem; individual end-users may want
to override the automated trip prediction subsystem or
control its behaviour to some degree.
Optimization: This module computes an optimal EV
charging plan, taking into account the estimated energy
production, required energy needs, expected durations
of charging periods and potential grid constraints. The
general approach for the optimization is discussed in
Section IV.
Customer relationship and billing information: This is
traditional IT infrastructure to maintain information on
customers, their billing information, as well as the meter-
ing of the EV-specific power consumption and feedbacks
into the grid. A user-facing client GUI needs to be
provided to enable users to manage their data and to let
the VPP operator interact with customer data.
Communication: To gather data from the various entities
(EVs, transport and distribution grid, power generation),
an appropriate communication infrastructure must be
deployed. This is discussed in Section V.
The sketch of our architecture is shown in Figure 1. Note
that the billing responsibilities can be transferred to another
service entity. Relevant metering information can be trans-
mitted from the VPP to a billing service; leveraging already
1 Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

existing infrastructure of electrical service providers.
The end-user functionality shall include the typical registra-
tion, de-registration and status retrieval functionality as well
as a possibility to override the automated trip and energy
forecasting mechanisms. The user may thus be enabled to
formulate unusual driving behaviour, either by indicating the
destination of his or her trip, the date, the anticipated driving
style - which could also be derived from EV status information
over time - or simply by indicating an amount of energy in,
for example, kWh.
Figure 2 shows the communication flows between the VPP
and its related, distributed entities. As can be seen, EVs
communciate with the VPP to transmit status information on
trips, state of charge, locations, etc. Grid information is made
available to allow the handling of grid constraints (statically)
as well as real-time power flows to potentially adjust the
charging plans during plan execution. The power-generation
entities provide planned power generation and possibly prices
which can also be adjusted during plan execution.
III. T RIP F ORECASTING
The optimization of the charging depends on the state-
of-energy goals for each EV. The end user expects the EV
to be sufficiently charged to survive the next trip or the
trips occurring in the next planning period. (The situation
for a PHEV is different: the internal combustion engine can
overcome empty batteries.) Given the limited charging power
typically seen in distribution grids, it may not be possible
to reach full state of energy between trips. In addition, full
charge may lead to costly overcharging during highly priced
charging periods: only the necessary amount of energy should
be purchased, and excessive, costly, purchases avoided. (This
assumes varying price levels.)
Hence it is of relevance to obtain a good estimation of the
expected trip behaviour in a planning period. This estimation
is based on historical trip data; for each trip the following data
has to be recorded:
1) Start-of-trip: A timestamp indicating when a trip starts.
2) End-of-trip: A timestamp indicating when a trip ends.
3) State-of-energy at start-of-trip: The energy stored in the
vehicle at the beginning of a trip.
4) State-of-energy at end-of-trip: The energy remaining at
the end of a trip.
5) Location at end-of-trip: The physical location reached at
the end of the trip, which becomes the starting location
for the next trip. (Locations are essential for determining
grid congestion.)
The type of information that needs to be gathered influences
the communication infrastructure, and this is reflected in
Section V. The algorithms using the data gathered for trip
forecasting do not influence the communication infrastructure,
and are therefore not the focus of this paper.
IV. O PTIMIZER
The optimizer is a core module of our architecture. First,
it invokes the trip-forecasting functionality for each vehicle
EVs Grid EV-VPP Generation Weather
service
Trip information
EV status Weather
forecasts
Grid status Production
schedules
Time
Optimizer
EV charging schedules Production
levels
Regulation up/down
Figure 2. VPP data flow.
and thus obtains an estimation of when a vehicle can be
charged and how much energy it must be charged with.
Secondly, the optimizer obtains the power generation forecast,
i.e., the amount of power available for EV charging during the
planning period. The optimization problem formulation in the
optimizer depends on the objective of the VPP. Each individual
power value is limited by the maximal deliverable power to
the EVs charging spot in each time slot.
An example of an objective is to minimize the total cost
of energy delivered to the EVs over all time slots. Another
objective can be to exactly match the total charging power to
the generated power.
Independently of the objective, the result of the optimization
steps should be a per-vehicle charging plan which is then
downloaded to the individual EVs. Note that the above op-
timization does not include grid constraints: the optimziation
problem also has to reflect the grids capacity if the objective
is to mitigate distribution grid bottlenecks.
A comparison of a linear and a quadratic optimization prob-
lem formulation is given in [21]. The comparison showed that
the linear formulation is sufficient for optimizing the charging
schedules. However, grids constraints were not considered
in [21]; methods of including these are currently developed.
V. C OMMUNICATION I NFRASTRUCTURE
To operate the distributed sensing and actuating infrastruc-
ture represented by demand response in general and EVs
in particular, an appropriate communication infrastructure is
required. It must be reliable, provide sufficient bandwidth, and
response times, support relevant security features, and also be
economical. Considering the number of entities involved in the
overall system - consider thousands of (roaming) EVs in the
future - the deployment of EVs poses substantial challenges.
The communication infrastructure needs to interface with
the power-system infrastructure and power-market stakehold-
ers when planning EV fleet operation to gather data on
generation planning, energy pricing, grid constraints, and grid
status. At the same time, the system has to respect both the
charging preferences of the individual car owners and the
electrical constraints of the distribution network to which each
EV is connected. This can be achieved by exercising soft real-
time control of individual EVs connected to the electrical grid.
The communication infrastructure also has to support the ac-
counting of energy consumption and of grid services provided.
It needs to support the roaming of EVs between different
service providers and geographies. The potential usage of V2G
in balancing power markets imposes strict requirements on
the communication infrastructure: for example, grid services
for primary and secondary power control as used within the
UCTE2 , entail clear communication requirements - mainly
regarding timeliness - if centralized control of distributed
energy resources (DER) were to be permitted in the future
[22], [23].
The communication infrastructure has to provide differ-
ent communication interfaces for different purposes, most of
which have already been defined by various organizations.
For example, market data interfaces are already provided by
the European Electricity Exchange (EEX) or Nordpool. The
balancing power market and control interface is given by the
relevant transmission service organization (TSO). Yet not fully
defined is the communication interface for EV-VPP to EV end-
to-end communication.
A. Communication Infrastructure Requirements
The minimum power an EV-VPP would need to provide
for participation, for example, in the German control system
is 5 MW for primary and 10 MW for secondary control.
This equates to about 1,700 EVs for primary and about 3,400
EVs for secondary control, assuming a 3 KW charging and
feedback power per EV. In addition, the ENTSO-E Operations
Handbook [23] also defines maximum activation delays. For
primary control, 50% of the contracted power has to be
activated within 15 s, 100% not later than 30 s after the
frequency deviation. Currently, primary control is activated
by frequency measurements local to the generation units
providing the control power (see [23]). To integrate EVs into
the primary control system, EVs either need to be equipped
with accurate and certified frequency meters for autonomous
activation or be activated from the central EV-VPP control
point. The first approach requires costly equipment on a
per-EV basis, the second solution only needs one accurate
and certified meter. However, current ENTSO-E activation
rules do not foresee centralized activation of DERs. Further
requirements for balancing power market participation are
real-time metering for the actual production level of each EV
and the battery charging levels of the EV fleet.
Starting with the physical and link communication layers,
the following options are possible:
Power line communications: These are most likely not
powerful and reliable enough to fulfill our technical
requirements and are expensive to install for a broad user
basis.
GSM and 3G wireless WAN: Wireless technologies are
readily available and, depending on pricing policies, rel-
2 Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity.
atively affordable. These mobile communication systems
thus are of practical interest for V2G purposes.
xDSL or cable (land-based internet): When considering
charging spots in residential homes, sharing an already
available internet connection is an option. The reuse of a
residential connection requires the protocols used to work
behind firewalls, Network Address Translation (NAT),
and with dynamic IPs
While networking over the internet and therefore the IP
protocol seem a given, questions about higher-layer transport
or applications protocols are not straightforward to answer.
An immediate solution to this would be the use of a
connection-oriented transport protocol (i.e., TCP), establishing
a connection from the charging spot to the EV-VPP upon hook-
up and keeping the connection alive until the EV disconnects.
This would allow easy access to data in both directions while
the EV is connected to the grid. Reliability and soft real-time
behaviour in the case of dropped connection re-establishment
may be issues. However, we believe that by far the biggest
issue would be scalability: considering thousands of EVs or
more requires considerable, and mostly idle, resources to keep
the connection sessions alive.
B. Session Initiation Protocol
A closer look at the communication patterns of an EV
communicating with an EV-VPP via a charging spot reveals
interesting similarities to well-known instant messaging (IM)
and voice-over-IP (VoIP)/telephony application protocols. An
IM client, for example, registers itself when connecting to
the network, downloads its buddy list (e.g. communication
partners) and then occasionally transmits user data. Similarly,
a VoIP client registers when connecting to the network and
establishes a session on user request. In addition to voice data,
VoIP transports out-of-band data for additional information,
for example DMTF tones.
A typical communication pattern for an EV-charging sce-
nario would be the following:
An EV registers with the EV-VPP when hooking up to a
charging spot;
The EV uploads its collected trip data and status (state-
of-energy);
The EV requests and downloads its charging plan for the
next charging session;
The EV stays reachable for the EV-VPP and vice versa
to allow updates of the charging plan and to be able to
receive control messages for participation in the balancing
power market. Note that only intermittent communication
takes place;
The EV disconnects, metering information is uploaded to
the EV-VPP before un-registering from the EV-VPP.
A standard protocol for VoIP/IM is the Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) [24]. We envision the use of SIP for session
establishment between the charging spot and the EV-VPP and
for provision of an out-of-band communication channel to
activate the time-critical grid services (such as primary or
 Charging spot SIP proxy EV-VPP
INVITE
INVITE
TRYING
RINGING
RINGING
OK
OK
ACK
TCP 61850 media session
Figure 3. SIP INVITE sequence diagram to set up a TLS/IEC61850 session
at beginning of a charging session
Charging spot SIP proxy EV-VPP
INVITE
OK
ACK
TCP 61850 media session
Figure 4. SIP re-INVITE sequence diagram to re-establish a TLS/IEC61850
session
secondary power control) and the necessary power metering
messages.
The bulk data exchange, including downloading and up-
dating charging plans, status information about the battery
and trip data, is to be performed over a separate connection
established via SIP. The data model used for such a data trans-
fer is IEC 61850 [25], encapsulated either in Manufacturing
Message Specification (MMS) [26] or over a web-services
protocol [27]. To detect firewalls, the Simple Traversal of
User Datagram through Network Address Translators (STUN)
protocol [28] shall be used.
For the proposed us of SIP for signalling during EV
charging, a typical message flow on connection of an EV is
shown in Figure 3. (The figure omits SIP REGISTER and
STUN sequences.)
On connection of an EV, the charging spot establishes, by
sending an SIP INVITE, a SIP session with the EV-VPP. This
session will remain open for the entire charging session. Based
on the NAT detection by STUN prior to the SIP INVITE
request, the Session Discovery Protocol (SDP) body defines
which party initiates the setup of a Transport Layer Security
(TLS) session between the charging spot and the EV-VPP [29].
The TLS session is used to securely exchange trip, battery
and metering data as well as to lock the charging plug, switch
on the charging power, and transmit the charging schedule.
After the initial data exchange, the EV connected follows
the charging schedule and no further communication may be
needed. To free resources, the TLS session is closed; the SIP
session however remains open.
Charging spot SIP proxy EV-VPP
INVITE
OK
ACK
TCP 61850 media session
BYE
BYE
ACK
ACK
Figure 5. Sequence diagram to close a charging session. Re-establish a
TLS/IEC61850 session to read out end of charging values and close SIP
session
To reestablish a TLS session during the charging session, for
example when a new charging schedule has to be transmitted,
the requesting party sends a SIP re-INVITE with the related
SDP message body to the SIP session partner. As in the initial
TLS session setup, the SDP in the re-INVITE describes who
initiates the TLS setup for NAT and firewall traversals. Figure
4 illustrates the necessary message flows. A re-INVITE mes-
sage can also be used to communicate an IP address change
of an endpoint during a charging session, which is needed
when using IP addresses with limited life-times assigned by
an internet service provider (ISP).
The above method describes a solution to avoid maintaining
long-term TCP connections to control and update EVs con-
nected to a charging spot. However, this demands a relatively
complex and long setup procedure when communication is
needed. While this is acceptable for high-volume data transfers
or intensive connection use during a session, it is a problem
for transmission of infrequent, small amounts of data and
near real-time requirements - as is the case for intelligent EV
charging and participation in the balancing power market. For
these application-specific purposes, we propose the use of the
SIP Protocol INFO message [30] to exchange session-related
control information during a SIP session. This message can
be initated by both SIP session parties and transfers control
information efficiently. Currently there is no standardized data
format or data encapuslation; an XML encapsulation seems
judicious.
To end a charging session, the EV driver requests the
charging spot to send a re-INVITE message to the EV-VPP to
set up a TLS session as described above. The request to end
the charging session is then securely exchanged over TLS: the
EV-VPP will read the meter, disable the power connection, and
unlock the charging plug. Once all neccessary cleanup tasks
have been done, the EV-VPP will close the TLS session and
send a SIP BYE command, see Figure 5.
VI. C ONCLUSION
The EV-VPP architecture presented in this paper uses a
centralized approach to optimize EV charging while respecting
EV user energy needs, grid constraints, and power balancing.
For the proposed architecture, the necessary communication
infrastructure requirements have been analyzed and the re-
sulting key requirements form the basis for the communica-
tion protocols chosen. We establish similarities between the
communication patterns of our VPP architecture and those of
IM and VoIP. The selected session initiation protocol (SIP)
meets our requirements, is a well-established standard, and
has proven its scalability.
Future work in the area of EV-VPP communication includes
refinements of the various protocols and their interactions, as
well as practical demonstrability to meet the stringent require-
ments of effective V2G integration. We are also interested in
the impact of unreliable communications on the outcome of the
optimization module, which has to be able to perform robust
planning in the presence of uncertainties to deliver usable
charging schedules.
VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Our architectural approach has benefitted from discus-
sions with with Peter Bach-Anderssen, Chresten Trholt, and
Franceso Marra. Per Vorm has first suggested the use of the
SIP protocols for EV-VPP purposes.
This work has been, in part, funded through the EDISON
project, a research project of the public Danish transmission
system operator Energinet.dks research program FORSKEL.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. You, C. Trholt, and B. Poulsen, Generic virtual power plants:
Management of distributed energy resources under liberalized electric-
ity market, in Proceedings of the 8th IET International Conference
on Advances in Power System Control, Operation and Management.
Hong Kong, China: Institution of Engineering and Technology, 811
November 2009.
[2] P. Lombardi, M. Powalko, and K. Rudion, Optimal operation of a
virtual power plant, in Proceedings of the IEEE Power & Energy Society
General Meeting, Calgary, Canada, 2630 July 2009, pp. 16.
[3] S. You, C. Trhold, and B. Poulsen, A market-based virtual power
plant, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Clean Elec-
trical Power (ICCEP). IEEE, June 2009.
[4] R. Caldon, A. Rossi, and R. Turri, Optimal control of a distribution
system with a virtual power plant, in Proceedings of Bulk Power System
Dynamics and Control Conference - VI, August 2004.
[5] P. B. Andersen, C. Trhold, and B. Poulsen, Evaluation of a generic
virtual power plant framework using service oriented architecture, in
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Power and Energy
(PECon 2008). IEEE, April 2008.
[6] Flexible electricity network to integrate the expected energy evolution,
http://www.fenix-project.org/.
[7] W. Kempton and J. Tomic, Vehicle-to-grid power fundamentals: Cal-
culating capacity and net revenue, Journal of Power Sources, vol. 144,
no. 1, pp. 268279, June 2005.
[8] J. C. Smith, R. Thresher, R. Zavadil, E. DeMeo, R. Piwko, B. Ernst,
and T. Ackermann, A mighty wind: Integrating wind energy into the
electric system is already generating excitement, IEEE Power & Energy
Magazine, pp. 4151, March 2009.
[9] Z. Xu, M. Gordon, M. Lind, and J. stergaard, Towards a Danish
power system with 50% wind: Smart grids activities in Denmark, in
Proceedings Power & Energy Society General Meeting. IEEE Power
Engineering Society, July 2009, pp. 18.
[10] S.-L. Andersson, A. Elofsson, M. Galus, L. Gransson, S. Karlsson,
F. Johnsson, and G. Andersson, Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles as
regulating power providers: Case studies of Sweden and Germany,
Energy Policy, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 2751 2762, 2010.
[11] C. Binding, D. Gantenbein, B. Jansen, O. Sundstrom, P. B. Andersen,
F. Marra, B. Poulsen, and C. Trhold, Electric vehicle fleet integration
in the Danish EDISON project - a virtual power plant on the island
of Bornholm, in Conference Proceedings IEEE PES General Meeting
2010. IEEE Power Engineering Society, July 2010.
[12] M. M. Collins and G. H. Mader, The timing of EV recharging and its
effect on utilities, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 32,
no. 1, pp. 9097, 1983.
[13] S. Rahman and G. Shrestha, An investigation into the impact of electric
vehicle load on the electric utility distribution system, IEEE Transaction
on Power Delivery, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 591597, April 1993.
[14] P. Farley, Speed bumps ahead for electric-vehicle charg-
ing, IEEE Spectrum, January 2010. [Online]. Available:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/magazine/
[15] F. Koyanagi and Y. Uriu, A strategy of load leveling by charging and
discharging time control of electric vehicles, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 11791184, 1998.
[16] M. D. Galus and G. Andersson, Demand management for grid con-
nected plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), in Proceedings of
IEEE Energy 2030 IEEE Conference on Global Sustainable Energy
Infrastructure. Atlanta, GA, USA: IEEE, November 2008, pp. 18.
[17] J. DiAdamo, Position Paper, SIP - Open Communica-
tions for Smart Grid Devices, Siemens, 2009. [Online].
Available: http://www.siemens-enterprise.com/es/Info Center/ /me-
dia/C304D674D4EC46E2AFDA69A65AB0C9DB.ashx
[18] R. A. Waraich, M. Galus, C. Dobler, M. Balmer, G. Andersson,
and K. Axhausen, Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and smart grid:
Investigations based on a micro-simulation, ETH Zurich, Switzerland,
Institute for Transport Planning and Systems, Tech. Rep. 10.3929/ethz-
a-005916811, 2009.
[19] J. P. Lopes, F. Soares, and R. R. Almeida, Identifying management
procedures to deal with connection of electric vehicles in the grid, in
Proceedings of IEEE Bucharest Power Tech Conference. IEEE, June
2009.
[20] S. Letendre and R. A. Watts, Effects of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
on the vermont electric transmission syst, Transportation Research
Board Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., January 2009.
[21] O. Sundstrom and C. Binding, Optimization methods to plan the charg-
ing of electric vehicle fleets, in International Conference on Control,
Communication and Power Engineering (CCPE 2010), Chennai, India,
July 2010.
[22] Operations Handbook P1 Load-Frequency Control and
Performance, ENTSO-E, 2009. [Online]. Available:
http://www.entsoe.eu/fileadmin/user upload/ library/publications/ce/oh/
Policy1 final.pdf
[23] Operations Handbook A1 Load-Frequency Control and
Performance, ENTSO-E, 2004. [Online]. Available:
http://www.entsoe.eu/fileadmin/user upload/ library/publications/ce/oh/
appendix1 v19.pdf
[24] J. Rosenberg, H. Schulzrinne, G. Camarillo, A. Johnston, J. Peterson,
R. Sparks, M. Handley, and E. Schooler, SIP: Session Initiation
Protocol, RFC 3261 (Proposed Standard), Internet Engineering Task
Force, Jun. 2002, updated by RFCs 3265, 3853, 4320, 4916, 5393, 5621,
5626, 5630. [Online]. Available: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3261.txt
[25] Communication networks and systems in substations, 1st ed., Commis-
sion Electrotechnique Internationale (IEC), July 2003.
[26] Industrial Automation Systems Manufacturing Message Specification
Part 1: Service Definition, International Standard Organization (ISO),
Geneva, Switzerland, 2003.
[27] Basic Profile Version 1.0, Web Services Interoperability Organization,
April 2004, http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.0.html.
[28] J. Rosenberg, R. Mahy, P. Matthews, and D. Wing, Session
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN), RFC 5389 (Proposed Standard),
Internet Engineering Task Force, Oct. 2008. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5389.txt
[29] J. Lennox, Connection-Oriented Media Transport over the Transport
Layer Security (TLS) Protocol in the Session Description Protocol
(SDP), RFC 4572 (Proposed Standard), Internet Engineering Task
Force, Jul. 2006. [Online]. Available: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4572.txt
[30] S. Donovan, The SIP INFO Method, RFC 2976 (Proposed Standard),
Internet Engineering Task Force, Oct. 2000. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2976.txt