Slide - KZO Innovations

internalchildlikeInternet and Web Development

Nov 12, 2013 (3 years and 5 months ago)

125 views

Fulfilling the

DoD Enterprise
Architecture Conference

April 14
-
18, 2008

Orlando, Florida

The Defense Information Enterprise:

Creating an Information Advantage



Orlando


16
April 2008

LLOYD THROWER

Director, Strategic Planning and Transformation

Office of the DoD Deputy Chief Information Officer

(703) 695
-
0871
.

lloyd.thrower@bta.mil

Defense Information Enterprise
Architecture (DIEA) 1.0


Provides a common foundation to accelerate the DoD’s
evolution to net
-
centric information sharing


Consolidates DoD CIO’s net
-
centric strategies into a set of
Principles and Rules that should guide all DoD IT operations
and investments


Empowers DoD Enterprise and Component CIO
-
level decision
-
makers by providing criteria to manage the DoD IT portfolio


Addresses a “To Be” vision 3
-
5 years in the future


Provides single entry point for users trying to navigate the many
DoD IT policies, strategies, standards, etc.

Enables Informed Discussions on the Key
Issues Driving the Evolution of DoD’s

Net
-
centric Environment

Broad Participation


Over 200 people from across DoD
participated in the development of the DIEA
through workshops and reviews.

DoD CIO / NII

DISA

US Army

US Navy

US Air Force

US Marine Corps

Joint Staff

USJFCOM

USCENTCOM

USSTRATCOM

USTRANSCOM

USD(I)

DNI

NSA

NGA

DIA



USD (AT&L)

BTA

DLA

DFAS

DARPA


DIEA Priorities


Data and Services Deployment (DSD)



Decouple data and
services from the applications and systems that provide them,
allowing them to be visible, accessible, understandable and
trusted. Lay the foundation for moving the DoD to a Service
-
Oriented Architecture (SOA).


Secured Availability (SA)



Ensure data and services are
secured and trusted across DoD. Allow users to discover
data and services and access them based on their
authorization.


Computing Infrastructure Readiness (CIR)



Provide the
necessary computing infrastructure and related services to
allow the DoD to dynamically respond to computing needs
and to balance loads across the infrastructure.


Communications Readiness (CR)



Ensure that an
evolvable transport infrastructure is in place that provides
adequate bandwidth and end
-
to
-
end, seamless net
-
centric
communications capability across all GIG assets.


NetOps Agility (NOA)



Enable the continuous ability to
easily access, manipulate, manage and share any
information, from any location at any time.

DIEA Products


DIEA Architecture
Description (OV
-
1)


Project Charter (AV
-
1)


Hierarchical Activity
Model (OV
-
5)


Principles and Rules
(OV
-
6a)


Glossary (AV
-
2)

Solutions Architectures

(Program / System
-
level)

Capability

Architectures

Strategic

Architectures

Operational / Mission

Architectures

www.defenselink.mil/cio
-
nii/cio/diea

How the Architecture Will Be Used

The rules and principles in the DIEA will be used to
align the Department to the net
-
centric information
sharing vision:


Joint Staff is embedding DIEA compliance into
interoperability policy


BTA is exploring combined compliance
checking of BEA and DIEA in a single process


Components and Capability Portfolio Managers
will align their programs and architectures


Solution architects will use the rules and
principles to guide the design of solutions

The
Defense

Information Enterprise

The Department of Defense information assets, processes,
activities, and resources required to achieve an information
advantage and share information across the Department and
with mission partners. The Defense Information Enterprise
includes:


the information itself, which is a key asset to the
Department, and the Department’s management over the
information life cycle;


the processes, including risk management, associated with
managing information to accomplish the DoD mission and
functions;


activities related to designing, building, populating,
acquiring, managing, operating, protecting and defending
the information enterprise; and


related information resources such as personnel, funds,
equipment, and information technology, including national
security systems.

Information as a Strategic Asset

DoD CIO Focus On Information

1.
New DoD 8000.1


Clearly lays out the role of the CIO leading
the Defense Information Enterprise

2.
Defense Information Enterprise (formerly
EIEMA) Architecture


What ALL DoD IT programs must do to
achieve the CIO Vision

3.
DoD IM/IT Strategic Plan


The CIO’s agenda over the next two years for
achieving the vision

DoDD 8000.01


Role Of The DoD
CIO

Introduces the
Defense Information Enterprise

concept as the
organizing CIO construct which focuses attention on
information



not networks
.


The GIG is the network environment that supports the
Defense Information Enterprise.

Enables simplifying entire policy structure


only one DoDD and
several supporting DoDIs, with the DoDD spanning:


DoD CIO and Component CIO roles


Information Sharing


GIG


Interoperability and Supportability

IM/IT
Strategic

Plan


DoD CIO
Priorities


Net
-
centric Transformation:

Accelerate DoD’s net
-
centric
transformation to facilitate effective and efficient warfighting,
intelligence and business processes and other national security
activities.


Information as a Strategic Asset:

Use information sharing to
enable effective and agile decision making through visible,
accessible, understandable and trusted data and services


when
and where needed.


Interoperable Infrastructure:

Ensure robust and reliable world
-
wide connectivity and infrastructure within DoD and with external
mission partners.


Assured Information Access:

Protect and defend DoD systems,
networks, and information to maximize mission assurance.


Return on Investment:

Institutionalize IT Portfolio Management
(PfM) and Enterprise Architecture (EA) to maximize the
contribution of IT investments to national security and defense
outcomes.


IT Workforce Development:

Maintain an agile IT workforce with
the skills to build, extend, exploit and defend a net
-
centric Defense
information enterprise.

What we look to EA to provide

Mission
-
specific operational threads that provide
guidance for the integration of capabilities to
achieve a mission

Enterprise
-
wide principles, rules and constraints
that provide guidance that clarifies the universally
applicable laws, regulations, and policies (LRP)

Capability
-
specific principles, rules and
constraints that provide additional context to LRP,
as well as describing target processes,
information, and services to guide capability
evolution

Overarching

Guidance

Capability

Guidance

Operational/

Mission

Guidance

Enterprise
-
level Architecture
Federation with Capability Portfolio
Management

Other

DISA

DLA

NSA

NRO

NGA

DIA

Component and Program
-
level Architectures

Dept of Army

Dept of Navy

Dept of Air Force

DoD
-
wide EA products

Ref Models

Tech Stds

Arch Stds

Federation Stds



Force Application

Building Partnerships

Command & Control

Protection

Logistics

Force Support

Corporate Mgmt & Support

Net
-
centric

Battlespace Awareness

Strategic Architectures

DISR

DODAF

EA Fed Strat

Capability Architectures

DoD EA RM

Joint

Capability

Areas

Capability Architectures

Capability Architectures

Capability Architectures

Capability Architectures

Capability Architectures

Capability Architectures

Capability Architectures

Capability Architectures

E
nterprise
-
level Architecture
Federation with Capability Portfolio
Management

Other

DISA

DLA

NSA

NRO

NGA

DIA

Component and Program
-
level

Dept of Army

Dept of Navy

Dept of Air Force

DoD
-
wide EA products

Ref Models

Tech Stds

Arch Stds

Federation Stds



Force Application

Building Partnerships

Command & Control

Protection

Logistics

Force Support

Corporate Management & Support

Net
-
centric

Battlespace Awareness

DIEA

GLOBAL C2


JC2

JDDA

COMMS & Transport

DISR

DODAF

EA Fed Strat

BEA

TAMD

IA

DoD EA RM

BEA

HRM Architecture

Joint

Capability

Areas

Next Steps

1.
Policy:

Provide clear, unambiguous direction


Formal Enterprise Architecture policy (DoDI)


Enhanced Architecture Federation guidance
(guidebook?)


Streamlined Interoperability policy (DoDD
4630/CJCSI 6212)

2.
Architecture Federation Tools:

Provide an integrated
EA compliance toolset (integrating ACART, JS
Compliance Tool, DITPR, etc.)

3.
Governance:

Provide mechanisms for decisions and
accountability.

4.
Implementation/Proof of Concept:

Leverage
opportunities such as joint basing to test concepts such
as ABAC, JEDS, CES, and joint e
-
mail

5.
Transition Planning/ Performance Measurement:
Implement a framework that enables the Department to
gauge progress toward achieving the net
-
centric vision

Fulfilling the

DoD Enterprise
Architecture Conference

April 14
-
18, 2008

Orlando, Florida

Panel Discussion: DoDAF v2.0


DoD Enterprise Architecture Conference


Orlando
-

15 April 2008

BRIAN G. WILCZYNSKI

Architecture & Interoperability Directorate

Office of the DoD Deputy Chief Information Officer

(703) 607
-
0252
.

brian.wilczynski@osd.mil

Introduction of Panel Members


Bruce Haberkamp,
Information Technology
Specialist, Headquarters Department of the
Army (CIO/G
-
6)



Deedee Akeo
,
Business Enterprise Architecture
Chief Architect, Business Transformation
Agency



Tim Hunnicutt,
Senior Associate, Booz Allen
Hamilton, Office of the Undersecretary of
Defense Personnel & Readiness Information
Management

Stakeholder Feedback

Operational Node

Relationship to NCOW RM

Relationship to FEA

Strategic Goals

Alignment to JCIDS/JROC

Information Assurance/Security

Service Specification Template

Net
-
Centricity

Service Oriented Architecture

Net
-
Centric Examples

Architecture Tiers

Service Interfaces

Authoritative Sources

BPMN

Capability related concepts

Measurement concepts

SA and OO

Other Frameworks

Service Description Framework

UPDM

ABM/ASM

Program vs. Enterprise Architecture Content

21

CADM

Phase III
:

Production

Initial

Input

Derive

MODAF

TOGAF

NAF

ASM UPDM CADM

DoDAF v2.0 Development Approach

Stakeholder

Feedback

Technical

Working

Group

Analysis

Methods

Group

BTA

Data

Group

Army CIO

Presentation

Group

USD P&R IM

Policy

FEA

GAO Assessment

Phase II: Synthesis

Net
-
Centricity

DoDAF 1.5

BPMN

SOA

Baseline

Requirements

DAS Process


JCIDS Process

PfM/CPM Process

Operations Processes

PPBE Process

SE Processes

Requirements Workshops Input

Phase I:

Requirements

Identification

Data
-
Centric

DOTMLPF

Federation

Semantic Interoperability

Mediation

Workshops

Interviews

Surveys

22





100% of all
Requirements


Spiral IV

10% of all
Requirements


Spiral I


35% of all
Requirements


Spiral II

90% of all
Requirements


Spiral III

Final Deliverable

Volumes I


III

Journal


Draft Conceptual Model


Draft DoDAF Outline


Volumes I

II Initial Write
-
ups


Volumes I


II Updates


Conceptual Model


Fit for Purpose Concept


Customer Requirements


DoDAF Structure


Enterprise Architecture


Journal Content




Volume I


III Updates



Exchange Specification



Conceptual and Logical


Data Model



New Potential Views



Journal Layout

18 Jan 08

4 Apr 08

27 Jun 08

12 Sep 08

DoDAF v2.0 Spirals

70%

Major Areas of Emphasis


Defining the DoDAF Metamodel (next
generation of the Core Architecture Data Model
(CADM))



Emphasizing service description



Defining an architecture development
methodology



Refining/expanding the current View structure



Encouraging the use of “Fit for Purpose”
visualizations

An Overview of the Department of Defense
Architecture Framework (DoDAF) 2.0


Method Technical Working Group (M
-
TWG)


DoD Enterprise Architecture Conference


Orlando
-

15 April 2008


DEEDEE AKEO


BEA Chief Architect

Business Transformation Agency

Discussion

Topics


Status of Method Technical Working Group (M
-
TWG) Efforts


M
-
TWG Findings to Date


Recommendations for Moving Forward

M
-
TWG Status


Foundational Principles


Methodology will provide the logical sequential steps from
the presentation layer to data layer


Addresses Fit
-
for
-
Purpose principle


Addresses incorporation of Service Descriptions


Methodology is technique/toolset
-
agnostic


Methodology will expose interdependencies between data
structures and presentation


Workshops Conducted and Analysis Done to Discern
Architecture Development Requirements


Systems Engineering (SE)


Joint Capabilities Integration Development System (JCIDS)


Operations


M
-
TWG Status


Six Step Process Originally
Defined in DoDAF 1.5 is
Baseline


Working lower level of detail


Added Overarching Planning


Technical & Managerial
viewpoints


Data collection requirements


Techniques to be used


Toolset decisions


Added Overarching Governance


Oversight of content


Oversight of development


Stakeholder participation
throughout is a must


M
-
TWG Findings


Stakeholders Requested
DoDAF

to be More Prescriptive


Stakeholder Issues:


Incorporation/Mandate of standards


Should the
DoDAF

mandate specific standards?


If so, where should standards be enforced?


Product set for
DoDAF

2.0 “process within the process”


6 Step Process is good but lower level of detail required


Guidance on how to use products is important


Service Description products should be added


M
-
TWG Recommendations


Stakeholders Request for Prescriptive Approach


Identify Core Set of Products


Activity/Process Model


Data Model


Service/System Conceptual Diagram


Service/System Interface Diagram


Capability Linkages


Definition of conformance to be added


Incorporation of Standards


Taxonomies


Services/System Functions


Activities


Architecture

Information Exchange


CADM XML


XMI

M
-
TWG Recommendations

30


Process Within the 6 Step Process


Dept. of Navy Architecture Development Process Model


BTA End
-
to
-
End Process

Develop
Scope for EA
Release

Document EA
Improvement
Proposals

Review EA
Improvement
Proposals

Prioritize EA
Improvement
Proposals

Approve
Scope of EA
Release
Plan EA
Release

Create Parent
CRs

Create Child
CRs (impacted
products)

Analyze
Changes v/s
release
schedule

Finalize
Release Plan
Develop
Products

Document
Product Changes

Conduct
Integration
Session

Arch. Verification

Finalize Product
Review

Present Product
for Organization
Lead Review

Update State of
Child CR
Conduct
Integration &
Acceptance
Review

Conduct Just
-
in
-
Time Training

Conduct
Integration
Review

Execute
Integration

Resolve Child
CR Issues

Conduct
Acceptance
Review
Package and
Deliver EA

Develop EA and
ETP HTML Links

Deliver EA
Summary, FAQs

Publish EA Docs
to Web

Document and
Manage Post
Acceptance
Changes to EA

Execute Build

Publish Release

Make EA Data
Avail. to Tools
Intended use is an input
to this entire process
Example
information

Way Ahead


Next Steps:


Work with D
-
TWG & P
-
TWG to Develop Templates for Data
Capture



Complete “Process within the Process”


Extract appropriate portions of E2E Process


Extract appropriate portions of ADPM


Combine into lower level process


Schedule Next M
-
TWG Meetings


Vet lower level process


Synchronize process with D
-
TWG


Finalize process for incorporation into DoDAF 2.0






M
-
TWG Contact Information


Deedee

Akeo
, Chair, MTWG


Deedee.Akeo@bta.mil


703.607.2032


Darryl Gunn, Co
-
Chair, MTWG


Darryl.L.Gunn@lmco.com


703.916.7395

Fulfilling the

DoD Enterprise
Architecture Conference

April 14
-
18, 2008

Orlando, Florida

An Overview of the Department of Defense
Architecture Framework (DoDAF) 2.0

Presentation Technical Working Group (P
-
TWG)


DoD Enterprise Architecture Conference


Orlando
-

15 April 2008



TIM HUNNICUTT

Senior Associate, Booz Allen Hamilton

DoDAF 2.0 P
-
TWG Co
-
Chair

P
-
TWG Status


Accomplishments to Date


Completed Joint Capabilities Integration Development System

(JCIDS) analysis


POC: Pam Flora
pamela.flora.ctr@osd.pentagon.mil








Held three of five Portfolio Management (
PfM
) working sessions


POC: Melissa
Burket

melissa.burket.ctr@osd.pentagon.mil



Focused looks on SE and Ops scheduled for the first week of May at the Lockheed
Martin Alexandria facilities


Goals of the meetings:


Define stakeholders


Brainstorm applicable presentation techniques


Collect product samples


P
-
TWG Findings


As an Architect it is critical to
recognize and acknowledge a
stakeholder’s view of the business



Stakeholder segmentation based on
stakeholders’ needs and motivations
allows messages to be directly
targeted to the appropriate audience



P
-
TWG research yielded five high
-
level stakeholder levels*


P
-
TWG has described five
presentation techniques to present
information to the stakeholder levels


* Aligned to
Zachman

Framework


P
-
TWG Status


Emphasize service description


Encourage the use of “Fit for Purpose” visualizations to help bridge the
gap between the architect and the business user


Establish a taxonomy of common architecture elements
(e.g., common
activity list, common system function list, etc.)



Refine/expand the current View structure


Questionnaire created to determine the frequency of development of
architecture products within the Department of Defense (
DoD
)


Softcopy available in DARS


Due on
April 25, 2008
to Melissa
Burket

(
burket_melissa@bah.com
)


Attach samples of “Other” Products, if applicable

P
-
TWG Way Ahead


Next meetings:


P
-
TWG PfM: Wednesday, April 23, 2008, 1pm


3pm


P
-
TWG Focused Looks at SE and OPS May 5
-
9th


P
-
TWG Full Membership: Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 9am
-
12pm


P
-
TWG PfM: Wednesday May 21, 2008, 9am


12pm





P
-
TWG Contact Information


Joyce Grigsby, Co
-
Chair, P
-
TWG


Joyce.grigsby@osd.pentagon.mil


703.696.7476


Tim Hunnicutt, Co
-
Chair, P
-
TWG


Tim.hunnicutt.ctr@osd.pentagon.mil


703.696.1956

Graphics

Reference Models

Low detail

Highly structured models

Physical models

Highly Detailed

Graphics

Logical Models

Moderate detail

Fulfilling the

DoD Enterprise
Architecture Conference

April 14
-
18, 2008

Orlando, Florida

An Overview of the Department of Defense
Architecture Framework (DoDAF) 2.0

Data Technical Working Group (D
-
TWG)


DoD Enterprise Architecture Conference


Orlando
-

15 April 2008


BRUCE HABERKAMP

IT Specialist

HQDA (CIO/G
-
6)

Discussion Topics


Status of Data Technical Working Group (D
-
TWG) Efforts


D
-
TWG Findings to Date


Recommendations


Way Ahead

D
-
TWG Status


Identified and Modeled Latest Concepts


Capability


Service


Measures


Derived Data Requirements from the
DoD

Enterprise
Processes


Systems Engineering (SE)


Joint Capabilities Integration Development System (JCIDS)


Operations


Derived Terms and Definitions from Various Sources


Joint Publication (JP) 1
-
02,
DoD

Dictionary of Military and Associated
Terms


CJCS Instruction 5120.02A, Joint Doctrine Development System


D
-
TWG Status

class Class Model
Capabilities
Services
Proj ects
Performers
Obj ect Exchanges
Rules
Measures
Foundation
accordi ng-to
accordi ng-to
to-meet
meet
sati sfy
fol l ow
l ead-to
l ead-to
meet
compl y-wi th
resul t-i n
resul t-i n
conduct
class Capability
Type
Capability
TemporalType
Effect
TemporalType
CapabilityConfiguration
Type
Measure
TemporalType
Condition
Performer
Organization
ExchangeObject
Materiel
TemporalType
Skill
ExchangeObject
Performer
PersonnelType
InterfaceType
TemporalType
Activity
TemporalType
RealProperty
Performer
System
realizes
1..*
is-part-of
0..*
is-a-part-of
0..*
is-a-part-of
is-a-part-of
0..*
is-a-part-of
0..*
is-a-part-of
0..*
results-in
0..*
0..*
is-a-part-of
0..*
applies-to
0..*
1..*
is-performed-under
class Services
Temporal Type
Effect
Type
Measure
Temporal Type
Condition
Organization
ExchangeObject
Materiel
Temporal Type
Skill
ExchangeObject
PersonnelType
InterfaceType
Temporal Type
Activity
Temporal Type
RealProperty
System
ServiceRequirement
ServiceImplementation
Rul e
Standard
PerformerState
Performer
SoftwareService
i s-a-part-
of
0..*
resul ts-i n
0..*
0..*
appl i es-
to
0..*
0..*
performs
1..*
i s-performed-by
class ExhangeObj ectFlow
PerformerState
Performer
TemporalType
ExchangeObj ect
Data
Materiel
Information
InterfaceType
TemporalType
Activity
Rule
Standard
according-
to
PersonnelType
1..*
is-performed-by
0..*
performs
0..*
is-produced-by
0..*
0..*
is-consumed-by
0..*
is-a-part-of
class Proj ect
Event
Type
Vision
Temporal Type
Proj ect
Temporal Type
Goal
Cost
Plan
Rul e
Means
InterfaceType
Temporal Type
Activity
Temporal Type
Condition
Temporal Type
PerformerState
Temporal Type
Effect
Type
Measure
1..*
i ni ti ates-
sti mul ates
0..*
i s-real i zed-by
0..*
di rects
0..*
1..*
i s-
real i zed-
by
i ni ti ates
i s-necessary-for
0..*
seeksChangeTo
1..*
0..*
changes
1..*
0..*
resul ts-i n
0..*
0..*
appl i es-to
0..*
class Rule
Type
Rule
Standard
Agreement
FunctionalStandard
TechnicalStandard
Guidance
Constraint
TemporalType
Condition
Means
UCORE IC-ISM-v2::
SecurityAttributesGroup
0..*
is-valid-under
1..*
class Measure - WIP
Cost
Type
Baseline::Measure
Timeliness
RateThroughput
Capacity
AccuracyPrecision
Dependability
NeedsSatisfactionMeasure
PerformanceMeasure
MaintainabilityMeasure
AdaptabilityMeasure
OrganizationalMeasure
Interoperability
Trustworthiness
Reliability
Security
class Performer
Performer
ExchangeObject
PersonnelType
System
SoftwareService
Organization
TemporalType
Skill
ExchangeObject
Materiel
InterfaceType
TemporalType
Activity
Rule
Standard
TemporalType
Network
TemporalType
PerformerState
according-
to
AbstractFeature
Type
GeoFeature
Location
1..*
is-performed-by
is-a-part-
of
0..*
performs
is at
2..*
is-part-
of

Developed and Defined Conceptual Data Model

D
-
TWG Findings


Concept of Capability Still Evolving


An ability to achieve an objective (
DoD

CADM)


The ability to execute a specified course of action (CJCSI 3170.01D, 12
March 2004)


The ability to achieve a desired effect under specified standards and
conditions through combinations of means and ways to perform a set of
tasks. (CJCSI 3170.01F, 1 May 2007)


Core concepts of Capability are the core concepts of
Enterprise Architecture:


Vision, goals, and objectives


Activities/Processes


Services, Systems, Roles, etc.


Constraints


Measures of Performance



D
-
TWG Findings


Multiple Ways of Handling Services Descriptions


Operationally


Technically


Stakeholders Suggestions:


Capture data enabling generation of Service Specification product


Activities


Functions


Standards


Information Exchange


Processes


Roles


Performance Metrics


Rules




Capture data enabling generation of Service Orchestration product


Comprises Service Specifications orchestrated to achieve an end result


Includes information flow


Includes information technology


Information Exchange Is A Priority


Physical Exchange Specification



D
-
TWG Recommendations


Use Authoritative Data Sources to Align to
Warfighter

Vocabulary


Produce a Logical Data Model of the Capability
Concepts as part of the EA Logical Data Model.


Produce Data Model Extracts Equivalent to Views and
Products to be used in Volume II


Include Physical Level Information as Part of
DoDAF

Way Ahead


Next Steps:


Ensure there are “hooks” to capture Service Description
Information Within the Logical Data Model



Modify AV
-
2 to Include Information from


Joint Publication (JP) 1
-
02,
DoD

Dictionary of Military and
Associated Terms


CJCS Instruction 5120.02A, Joint Doctrine Development System



Complete the Logical Data Model



Define and Develop Physical Exchange Specification for
Volume III of
DoDAF






D
-
TWG Contact Information


Bruce
Haberkamp
, Chair, D
-
TWG


Bruce.Haberkamp@us.army.mil


703.602.7261


Forrest Snyder, Co
-
Chair
, D
-
TWG


Forrest.Snyder@us.army.mil


703.602.7365