The DHS Architecture Framework Meet System of Systems Needs


Published on

Published in: News & Politics, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The DHS Architecture Framework Meet System of Systems Needs

  1. 1. PSAF Public Safety Architecture Framework
  2. 2. Agenda Show PSAF based on comparison to DoDAF <ul><li>Overview </li></ul><ul><ul><li>History </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Purpose </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DOD Acquisition Process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Types of views </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Tools </li></ul><ul><li>PSAF discussion </li></ul><ul><li>Sources of Info / Training </li></ul>
  3. 3. PSAF History <ul><li>Originated with C4ISR Architecture Framework in 1996 </li></ul><ul><li>Version two in 1997 </li></ul><ul><li>Expanded beyond C4ISR to all systems in 2004 with introduction of Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DODAF) </li></ul><ul><li>PSAF Adopted by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in March 2006 </li></ul>
  4. 4. PSAF Components <ul><li>PSAF Volume I provides definitions, guidelines, and related background material. -issued </li></ul><ul><li>PSAF Volume II contains detailed descriptions of the three PSAF views and the products that create each of the views. -issued </li></ul><ul><li>PSAF Volume III will document procedures for using the methodology outlined in PSAF Volume I and PSAF Volume II upon development of a supporting PSAF tool vetted with the practitioner community. Note that PSAF Volume III will likely be a user guide, although for simplicity it is referred to here as PSAF Volume III . –not issued </li></ul>Same as the organization of the PSAF.
  5. 5. PSAF <ul><li>PSAF v1.0 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The structure of components, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>their relationships , </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>and the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution over time </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. PSAF Purpose <ul><li>Ensure interoperability by setting out a common architectural representation. </li></ul><ul><li>Allow other systems to identify connection points and design compatible architectures. </li></ul><ul><li>Not a design tool- this precedes the engineering process. </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>To audience: Thoughts on this one? Are you using DoDAF differently? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Ensure comparison and relation of architecture descriptions across organizational boundaries (city to county), including jurisdictional and first responder discipline boundaries (fire to police.) </li></ul>
  7. 7. Architecture and then Design <ul><li>System Architecture is used: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To make buy decisions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To discriminate between options </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To “discover” the true requirements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To drive one or more systems to a common “use” or purpose </li></ul></ul><ul><li>System Design is used: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To develop system components </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To build the system </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To understand configuration changes as the system is modified </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Focus of PSAF is Communications Interoperability <ul><li>PSAF is much more product oriented than the DoDAF. </li></ul><ul><li>DHS is oriented on: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>fulfilling the National Response Plan which is built on the National Incident Management System (NIMS). </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>How agencies work together in an emergency. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Public Safety Statement of Requirements (PS SoR) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Share division for using comm assets in the field. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Why did DHS adopt the DoDAF? What was the problem they needed to solve? <ul><li>Public Safety Community key issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incompatible and aging comm equipment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited and fragmented radio spectrum </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited and fragmented budget ccles and funding </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited equipment standards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited and fragmented planning and coordination </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Common theme in PSAF is Communications Interoperability </li></ul><ul><li>Step back from DoDAF to C4ISR AF style </li></ul>
  10. 10. Structure <ul><li>The PSAF contains four main types of guidance for architecture development: </li></ul><ul><li>Guidelines , which include a set of guiding principles and guidance for building architectures that are compliant with the framework </li></ul><ul><li>High-level process for using the framework to develop architecture descriptions that fulfill a purpose </li></ul><ul><li>Discussion of architecture data and tools that can serve as facilitators of the architecture-description process </li></ul><ul><li>Detailed description of the products </li></ul>
  11. 11. Products <ul><li>The PSAF defines 26 different architecture products, which are organized into the All , Operational , Systems , and Technical Standards views. The PSAF emphasizes the need for developing or presenting the products that are appropriate for a given audience. </li></ul>Same as the organization of the DoDAF.
  12. 12. DHS “Acquisition” Process in Flux <ul><li>DOD mandates some views as part of its process </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incremental delivery of Views based on the development cycle (few to start and more as you progress to later milestones.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Bigger system or Family of Systems equates to more required views. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>DHS is beginning to mirror this. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mission Needs Statement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Urban Area grants tied to meeting DHS guidelines </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Types of Views (26) <ul><li>Operational View (9) </li></ul><ul><li>System View (13) </li></ul><ul><li>Technical View (2) </li></ul><ul><li>All View (2) </li></ul><ul><li>Naming convention is SV-1, OV-2, TV-2, etc… </li></ul>Same as the organization of the PSAF.
  14. 14. PSAF View Relationships
  15. 15. DoDAF View Relationships Same as the organization of the PSAF.
  16. 16. Operational View <ul><li>PSAF: The Operational View (OV) describes the tasks and activities , operational elements, and information exchanges required to accomplish public safety missions . </li></ul><ul><li>DoDAF: The Operational View (OV) describes the tasks and activities necessary to successfully perform a mission , the participating nodes, and the associated information exchanges . </li></ul><ul><li>These include examining </li></ul><ul><ul><li>business processes for reengineering or technology insertion, training personnel, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>examining doctrinal and policy implications, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>coordinating relationships, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>and defining the operational requirements to be supported by resources and systems (e.g., communications throughput, specific node-to-node interoperability levels, information transaction time windows, and security protection needed.) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Materiel independent. </li></ul>
  17. 17. Operational View <ul><ul><li>(DM) OV-1 Operational Concept Graphic. Provides a graphical and textual description of the operational concept. The cover of the binder . </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>* (DM) (PM) OV-2 Operational Node Connectivity Description. Lists the operational nodes, activities performed at each node, connectivity, and information needs between nodes. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OV-3 Operational Information Exchange Matrix. Lists and describes information exchanged between nodes. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(DM) OV-4 Organizational Relationships Chart. Lists organizations, roles, and relationships among organizations. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>* (DM) (PM) OV-5 Operational Activity Model. Details the activities performed and their interrelationships, including input/output relationships. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OV-6a Operational Rules Model. Identifies business rules that govern or constrain operations. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OV-6b Operational State Transition. Identifies sequencing and timing of activities. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(DM) OV-6c Operational Event Trace. Traces actions in a scenario or sequence of events. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OV-7 Logical Data Model. Identifies data requirements of the operational view. </li></ul></ul>DM- Mandatory DoDAF product PM- Mandatory PSAF product
  18. 18. Operational View <ul><li>Depicts what is going on in the real world that is to be enabled by systems represented in the architecture. </li></ul><ul><li>Activities performed as parts of public safety missions and the associated information exchanges among personnel or organizations are the primary items modeled in operational views. </li></ul><ul><li>The operational view reveals requirements for capabilities and interoperability. </li></ul>
  19. 19. OV Traceability
  20. 20. Systems View <ul><li>PSAF: The Systems View is a set of graphical and textual products that describes systems and interconnections , which provide public safety functions. The SV associates system resources to the OV . These systems resources support the operational activities and assist the exchange of information among operational nodes . </li></ul><ul><li>DoDAF: The Systems View (SV) describes the systems of concern and the connections among those systems. </li></ul><ul><li>For many purposes, an SV will need to further detail the information exchanges describe in the OV in order to translate node-to-node exchanges into system-to-system transactions, communications capacity requirements, security protection needs, etc. </li></ul>
  21. 21. Systems View <ul><li>Describes existing and future systems and physical interconnections that support the needs documented in the operational view. </li></ul><ul><li>The SV may be used for many purposes, including systems baselining, making investment decisions concerning cost-effective ways to satisfy operational requirements, and evaluating interoperability improvements. </li></ul>
  22. 22. Systems View Products <ul><ul><li>(PM) SV-1 Systems Interface Description. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lists systems, system components, and their interconnections. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-2 Systems Communications Description. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Identifies system communications. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-3 Systems-Systems Matrix. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lists connections between individual systems in a group. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(DM) SV-4 Systems Functionality Description. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lists functions performed by individual systems and the related information flow. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(DM) SV-5 Operational Activity-to-Systems Function Traceability Matrix. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Maps systems information back to the operational view. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(DM) SV-6 Systems Data Exchange Matrix. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Provides detail of data moving between systems. </li></ul></ul></ul>DM- Mandatory DoDAF product PM- Mandatory PSAF product
  23. 23. Systems View (contd) <ul><ul><li>SV-7 Systems Performance Parameters Matrix. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lists performance characteristics of individual systems. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-8 Systems Evolution Description. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lists migration plans for systems. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-9 Systems Technology Forecast. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lists technologies and products that are expected to affect systems. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-10a Systems Rules Model. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Describes constraints on system operation imposed by design or implementation. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-10b Systems State Transition Description. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Describes system activity sequencing and timing. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-10c Systems Event Trace Description. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Describes system-specific requirements on critical event sequences. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SV-11 Physical Schema. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Describes the physical implementation of the logical data model from the operational view. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  24. 24. SV Traceability
  25. 25. Technical Standards View <ul><li>PSAF: The TV is the minimal set of rules governing the arrangement, interaction, and interdependence of system parts or elements. </li></ul><ul><li>Its purpose is to ensure that a system satisfies a specified set of operational and functional requirements. The TV provides the technical systems implementation guidelines upon which engineering specifications are based. </li></ul><ul><li>DoDAF : The Technical Standards View (TV) describes a profile of the minimal set of time-phased standards and rules governing the implementation, arrangement, interaction, and interdependence of systems. </li></ul><ul><li>The appropriate use of the TV is to promote efficiency and interoperability and to ensure that developers can adequately plan for evolution. </li></ul><ul><li>Includes current and projected standards. </li></ul>
  26. 26. Technical Standards View <ul><li>* (DM) (PM) TV-1 Technical Standards Profile </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Catalogs standards that apply. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>TV-2 Technical Standards Forecast </li></ul><ul><ul><li>This view augments the systems view with technical detail and forecasts of standard technology evolution sorted by timeline. </li></ul></ul>DM- Mandatory DoDAF product PM- Mandatory PSAF product
  27. 27. OV, SV and TV <ul><li>Interoperability is a typical architecture focus that demonstrates the criticality of developing these inter- view relationships. </li></ul><ul><li>The OV describes the nature of each information exchange in detail sufficient to determine the degree of operational interoperability required. </li></ul><ul><li>The SV identifies which systems support the operational requirements, translates the required degree of interoperability into a set of system data exchanges executed by system functions, and compares current/postulated implementations with the required operational capabilities. </li></ul><ul><li>The TV articulates the criteria that govern the compliant implementation of each required system that will result in the fielding of an interoperable system. </li></ul>
  28. 28. Product Interrelationships DoDAF the same as the PSAF.
  29. 29. OV, SV and TV <ul><li>The three views and their interrelationships provide the basis for deriving measures such as interoperability or performance and also provide the basis for measuring the impact of the values of these metrics on operational mission and task effectiveness. </li></ul>
  30. 30. All View <ul><li>* (DM) (PM) AV-1 Overview and Summary Information </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Details scope, purpose, intended users, environment, and other summary-level formation for an architecture description. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>(PM) AV-2 Integrated Dictionary Data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Provides definitions of all terms used in all products. </li></ul></ul>DM- Mandatory DoDAF product PM- Mandatory PSAF product
  31. 31. All View <ul><li>PSAF: The AV products provide information pertinent to the entire architecture. These include tactics, techniques, and procedures; relevant goals and vision statements; CONOPs. The AVs document what the architecture aims to achieve. (Note PSAF talks about TTPs) </li></ul><ul><li>DoDAF: Augments the other views by providing context, summary or overview-level information, and an integrated dictionary to define terms. </li></ul>
  32. 32. Essential Views PSAF minimum set. AV-1. AV-2, OV2, OV-5, SV-1, TV-1 DoDAF minimums DoDAF is time phased, PSAF is not yet ICD – MS A, CDD – MS B, CPD – MS C AV-2 SV-1 CPD CDD ICD Document X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X TV-1 SV-6 SV-5 SV-4 OV-6C OV-5 OV-4 OV-2 OV-1 AV-1
  33. 33. DoDAF Case Study <ul><li>PSAF examples not out yet- Vol III </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>The above URL brings you to the Software consortium. Scroll to the “Case Study” to see a partial set of DoDAF views that were created for a notional package delivery system. </li></ul>
  34. 34. DoDAF Tools <ul><li>POPKIN System Architect (now owned by Telelogic) </li></ul><ul><li>Enterprise architect (Telelogic) </li></ul><ul><li>UML </li></ul><ul><li>Core </li></ul><ul><li>SysML – emerging </li></ul><ul><li>The vendors have produced several high power tools to support DODAF. </li></ul>
  35. 35. PSAF Tools <ul><li>Will the vendors do a PSAF tool as well? </li></ul><ul><li>I am researched with Telelogic /CORE. </li></ul><ul><li>Big vendors were unaware of the PSAF (at elast the ones I spoke to.) </li></ul><ul><li>Seems that a tool is a tool and if you use a hammer for a building at Camp Pendleton, you can use that same hammer to build a fire station. </li></ul><ul><li>SAFECOM is building some tools-unsure of what will come of that effort. </li></ul>
  36. 37. Sources of Info <ul><li>PSAF Vol I and II (III pending) </li></ul><ul><li>INCOSE –UCSD Course </li></ul><ul><li>AFCEA 1-2 week classes </li></ul><ul><li>Consultant presentations 2-14 days </li></ul><ul><li>DoDAF tool vendors </li></ul><ul><li>DoDAF Vols I, II and the Deskbook (good to use) </li></ul><ul><li>The old C4ISR AF has the best examples and people often use it to get a start on building the products. </li></ul>
  37. 38. AT/FP Incident Reporting OV-1 “As Is” (Circa 2005) CONUS Posts CONUS Posts CONUS Camps CONUS Camps CONUS Ports and Naval Bases CONUS Ports and Naval Bases CONUS Bases CONUS Bases Incident Navy CADS Marine Corps CLEOC Army COPS Air Force I2MS Shows the Anti-Terrorism / Force Protection incident reporting process in effect. The problem it illustrated was the time lag before an incident in one service was passed to all (with no certainty it would be passed. DoD Force Protection Information Sharing Today DoD Joint Staff Washington Navy Yard Peterson AFB Peterson AFB Peterson AFB Peterson AFB Ft Carson Ft Carson Ft Carson Ft Carson MCB Quantico MCB Quantico MCB Quantico MCB Quantico Washington Navy Yard Washington Navy Yard Washington Navy Yard
  38. 39. AT/FP Incident Reporting OV-1 “To Be” (Circa 2006) NORTHCOM COP CONUS Posts CONUS Posts CONUS Camps CONUS Camps CONUS Ports and Naval Bases CONUS Ports and Naval Bases CONUS Bases CONUS Bases Navy CADS Marine Corps CLEOC Army COPS Air Force I2MS, Blotter Joint Protection Enterprise Network Guard (U)->(S) Incident Shows the desired Anti-Terrorism / Force Protection incident reporting process. The outcome of this system would be an instantaneous sharing of an AT/FP incident to all services, the intel agencies, and the Joint Staff. Intel Community DoD Joint Staff Washington Navy Yard Peterson AFB Peterson AFB Peterson AFB Peterson AFB Ft Carson Ft Carson Ft Carson Ft Carson MCB Quantico MCB Quantico MCB Quantico MCB Quantico Washington Navy Yard Washington Navy Yard Washington Navy Yard A Net - Centric Approach to DoD Force Protection Information Sharing Interagencies
  39. 40. PSAF Evolution <ul><li>Established DOD tool with an emerging application </li></ul><ul><li>DHS is organizing and evolving while implementing the framework </li></ul><ul><li>Probably going to be some false starts </li></ul><ul><li>Big difference: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>DoDAF – mandated by a single leadership entity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>PSAF – The local city does not work for DHS so why pay attention? </li></ul></ul>