DoD Enterprise Architecture & Standards The Future of Architecture 16 September 2009 Walt Okon Senior Architect Engineer Senior Architect Engineer for Information Sharing Enterprise Architecture and Standards Directorate DoD Chief Information Officer (703) 607- 0502 . [email protected]
23
Embed
DoD Enterprise Architecture & Standards The Future of Architecture 16 September 2009 Walt Okon Senior Architect Engineer Senior Architect Engineer for.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Motivation– US DoD and UK MOD interested in leveraging
commercial standards for their Military Architecture Framework
– Military Architecture Framework Tool Interoperability Key Goal for DoD, MOD, NATO
– Formal MetaModel basis for the Military Architecture Framework Critical to Interoperability Objectives
Proliferation of Military Architectural frameworks– DoDAF, MODAF, DNDAF, NAF, AGATE,
ADOAF, MDAF, etc.
Architecture Exchange - Why
UPDM – Unified UPDM – Unified Profile for Profile for
DoDAF/MODAFDoDAF/MODAF
AdaptiveAdaptive
Artisan SoftwareArtisan Software
ASMGASMG
BAE SystemsBAE Systems
DoDDoD
DNDDND
embeddedPlusembeddedPlus
GenericGeneric
IBMIBM
ThalesThales
Lockheed Martin CoLockheed Martin CoMitreMitreL3 CommsL3 CommsMODMOD
NoMagicNoMagic
RaytheonRaytheon
Rolls RoyceRolls Royce
Sparx SystemsSparx Systems
VisumPointVisumPoint
SelexSelex
UPDM RFC UPDM RFC GroupGroup
Walt OkonWalt OkonMatthew HauseMatthew Hause
Defense-Industry Challenge: Synchronization of DoDAF-UPDM Lifecycles
2. Industry Produces Develops Generic
Modeling &EngineeringStandards
3. Vendors Produce Product
VersionsDefense Domain Tools
“Just-In-Time”
1. GovernmentsProduce BaselinesDevelop, Evolve &
HarmonizeDefense Enterprise
ArchitectureFrameworks
For Acquisition
Leverages Vendors Standards-Based Tools & Government Frameworks
Core Architecture Data Model
All View
Syst
ems/S
ervi
ces
View
Technical StandardsV
iew
Operational View
RFC
class Class Model
Capabilities Serv ices
Projects
PerformersObject Exchanges
RulesMeasures
Foundation
according-to according-toto-meet
meet
satisfy follow
lead-to lead-to
meet comply-with
result-inresult-in
conduct
class Capability
Type
Capability
TemporalType
Effect
TemporalType
CapabilityConfiguration
Type
Measure
TemporalType
Condition
Performer
Organization
ExchangeObject
Materiel
TemporalType
Skill
ExchangeObjectPerformer
PersonnelType
InterfaceTypeTemporalType
Activ ity
TemporalType
RealProperty
Performer
System
real izes
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 Serv ices
TemporalType
Effect
Type
Measure
TemporalType
Condition
Organization
ExchangeObject
Materiel
TemporalType
Skill
ExchangeObject
PersonnelType
InterfaceTypeTemporalType
Activ ity
TemporalType
RealProperty
System
Serv iceRequirement
Serv iceImplementation
Rule
Standard
PerformerState
Performer
SoftwareServ ice
is-a-part-of
0..*
results-in
0..*
0..*
applies-to 0..*
0..*
performs1..*is-performed-by
class ExhangeObjectFlow
PerformerState
Performer
TemporalType
ExchangeObject
Data
Materiel
Information
InterfaceTypeTemporalType
Activ ity
Rule
Standard
according-
to
PersonnelType
1..*
is-performed-by
0..*
performs
0..*
is-produced-by
0..*
0..*
is-consumed-by0..*
is-a-part-of
class Project
Ev ent
Type
Vision
TemporalType
Project
TemporalType
Goal
Cost
Plan
Rule
Means
InterfaceTypeTemporalType
Activ ity
TemporalType
Condition
TemporalType
PerformerState
TemporalType
EffectType
Measure
1..*
initiates-stimulates
0..*
is-realized-by
0..*
directs
0..*
1..*
is-realized-by
initiatesis-necessary-for
0..*
seeksChangeTo
1..*
0..*
changes
1..*
0..*
results-in
0..*
0..*
applies-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
SoftwareServ ice
Organization
TemporalType
Skill
ExchangeObject
Materiel
InterfaceTypeTemporalType
Activ ity
Rule
StandardTemporalType
Network
TemporalType
PerformerState
according-
to
AbstractFeatureType
GeoFeature
Location
1..*
is-performed-by
is-a-part-of
0..*
performs
is at
2..*
is-part-of
Architecture Models + Data = Architectural
Description
Fit-for-Purpose (FFP)
Architecture
ModelsArchitectural Description
Fit-for-Purpose describes an architecture that is appropriately focused and directly support customer needs or improve the overall process undergoing change. The models provide choices, based upon the decision-maker needs.
Architecture
Data + Metadata
Things
Individuals
Types or classes of individuals or things
Operational Model
Example
14
DoDAF V2.0 Focus
Focus: architecture DATA,
not Products
Results: Better ANALYSIS and
Decisions.
DoDAF V2.0 provides overarching architecture concepts, guidance, best practices, and methods to enable and facilitate architecture development.
• Tools– DoD Architecture Registry System (DARS)– DoD IT Standards Registry (DISR)– GIG Technical Guidance (GTG) Tool
• Education and Training– DoD Architecture Training Effort
All this is nothing without Certified Architects!
Architecture Training DKO Site
• URL - https://www.us.army.mil/suite/page/530507
DoD Architecture Education & Training
• DoD must identify Architect’s opportunities for Education & Training
• Identifies core KSAs Architects must have to be able to design, develop, and deliver DoD architectures that enable senior leader decision making and engineering design
• Analyze and define the types of architecture training at different levels of architecture
• DoD – IT Architects Career Path–Architects Series
• Define a certification requirement and process
White Paper: Outline
• Preface
• Introduction
• Purpose, Scope, and Approach
• Findings
• Recommended Way Ahead
The DoD Architect Competency Framework– A culmination of input gathered
through research, interviews, and workshops on the standard knowledge, skills, and abilities DoD Architects should obtain at varying levels of maturity.
https://www.us.army.mil/suite/doc/10757012
DOD Architect Levels
Level 1 Development
Primary function is to develop architectures based on user requirements and input from subject matter experts
Level 2 Analysis
Primary function is to analyze architectures for the purposes of integration, interoperability, gap analysis, risk assessment, leveragability, compliance, and business decision making
Level 3Management
Primary function is to lead and manage an architecture effort through its entire lifecycle, from development to execution/implementation
White paper identifies the functions and associated KSAs for each level. These KSAs are independent of educational degree, working domain (contractor, civilian, military), or career title (GS level, rank, or role).
Roadmap to the Future
• Deliver an IT EA Education & Training Strategic Plan
• Deliver an architect careers plan
• Establish architecture specialties in Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
• Formalize a Architect’s Competency Framework
• Implement certification across architecture specialties
• Work with academic and educational institutions to enhance their curricula
Strategic Plan 2009Draft 1.7a
DOD IT ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE
TRAINING & EDUCATION
DKO Site
• URL - https://www.us.army.mil/suite/page/530507
Save the date!
May 10-14, 2010
DoD Enterprise Architecture Conference 2010, San Antonio, TX