Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

UML Profile for DoDAF/MODAF

2,278 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

UML Profile for DoDAF/MODAF

  1. 1. UML Profile for DoD and MoD Architecture Frameworks (UPDM) 9/22/2005 Fatma Dandashi, Ph.D. [email_address]
  2. 2. Problem Statement <ul><li>DODAF V1.0 Volume II provides guidance on using UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Used extensively to represent DODAF architecture products across industry </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not sufficiently precise resulting in multiple interpretations (no one-to-one mapping between UML diagrams and DODAF products) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Based on UML 1.x which has been superseded by UML 2 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Tool interoperability impeded by DODAF adaptations, such as MODAF & NAF, and DODAF overlays, such as JCIDS and Acquisition </li></ul>DODAF UML guidance is inadequate to facilitate communications, architecture product reuse & maintainability, and tool interoperability
  3. 3. Industry and Coalition Feedback <ul><li>Presented architecture framework standardization effort through the OMG in early February </li></ul><ul><li>Resistance to immediate standardization of a UML profile for a generic Architecture Framework </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Scope is too large to complete in a reasonable amount of time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tool Vendors concerned about lack of market and technical risks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Strong request for a UML profile that implements standard representations for DODAF/MODAF </li></ul><ul><li>Support for follow-on effort to establish standards for the specification of generalized architecture frameworks </li></ul><ul><li>Coalition partners and their industry partners requested that their requirements be included </li></ul>
  4. 4. Solution Statement <ul><li>DODAF V 1.0 exposed a need for architecture-based model-driven systems engineering </li></ul><ul><li>SysML is a UML profile for model-driven systems engineering </li></ul><ul><li>Initial analysis indicates good coverage of all DODAF/MODAF views with SysML* </li></ul>Develop a UML Profile for DODAF/MODAF that provides an industry standard SysML representation of DODAF/MODAF architecture views * see Bailey et al in references section
  5. 5. UML Profile for DODAF/MODAF RFP Scope <ul><li>Use DODAF V1.0 as a baseline </li></ul><ul><li>Incorporate MODAF’s additional views (Acquisition and Strategic views) </li></ul><ul><li>Incorporate additional requirements from DODAF V2.0 WG (e.g., support for overlays) </li></ul><ul><li>Support for modeling system-of-systems architectures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Systems that include hardware, software, data, personnel, procedures, and facilities (DOTMLPF & MOD Lines of Development ) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Service oriented architectures and net-centricity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Scope accommodates NATO and other architecture frameworks (e.g., Australia and Canada) </li></ul>
  6. 6. UPDM RFP Status <ul><li>RFP has been issued by OMG </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Several comment iterations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>January-Feb, June, Aug 05 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>A result of collaboration with DoD and MOD representatives </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Incorporates numerous inputs from </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tool Vendors : Adaptive, Artisan Software, Borland, I-Logix, IBM-Rational, Proforma Corp., Telelogic/Popkin Software </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Industry : e.g., BAE Systems, Boeing, Fujitsu, Hitachi, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Thales, Unisys </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gov : DoD, MOD, NATO, and positive feedback from Canadian and Australian Defence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not-for-profit Organizations : Sandia Labs, SEI, Mitre, Middlesex University </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. UPDM RFP Requirements Summary <ul><li>Mandatory </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Develop profile that specifies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Metamodel (abstract syntax and constraints) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>UML2 Profile </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Notation (concrete syntax) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>DODAF and MODAF artifacts </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Additional views and viewpoints </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Element taxonomy reference </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Data interchange </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Optional </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Support </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Domain Metamodel </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Data Interchange mappings and transformations </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Extensibility to other architecture frameworks </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Representation of architectural patterns </li></ul></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Metamodel <ul><li>Defines: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Key terms and definitions used in the proposed profile </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Concepts that are required for the description of architectures and consistent with those defined in IEEE 1471 and specific architecture frameworks (e.g., DODAF, MODAF) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Constraints on elements that ensure connectivity and integrity of the model </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. SV-1 Meta-Model Excerpt* Source: http://www.modaf.com/
  10. 10. Notation & Profile <ul><li>Define: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The selected UML modeling elements using a standard notation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Their stereotypes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Additional constraints using the profiling mechanism provided by UML </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The relationship of notation to model elements defined by the metamodel shall be represented in tabular form </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Example SV-1: Assembly Diagram SpeedPass <<System>> asm: SpeedPass Systems Nodes showing System Interfaces (Interfaces and Ports) GasStation <<assembly>> OilCoCentral <<assembly>> GasPump <<assembly>>
  12. 12. Views & Viewpoints <ul><li>DODAF/MODAF artifacts using UML/SysML </li></ul><ul><li>New model elements using MOF QVT, when no direct diagrammatic representation is provided for individual DODAF and MODAF artifacts in UML/SysML </li></ul>
  13. 13. AcV-2 SoS Acquisition Programmes new Acquisition View s define the project team structures required to deliver network enabled capabilities. They also define the inter-project dependencies and specify the lines of development status at significant project milestones. Source: http://www.modaf.com/ FOC 01/01/06 P eople O rganisation S ustainment E quipment T raining D octrine LoDs Pre-IG IG to MG MG to IOC IOC to FOC In Service Disposal Key to View Project Phase No outstanding issues Manageable issues Critical issues LoD 'Hexagon' 2004 2005 System A FOC 01/08/05 IOC 01/04/05 MG 01/10/04 System C IOC 01/10/06 IG 01/06/04 MG 01/01/05 System B MG 01/11/04 IG 01/05/04 IOC 01/06/04 System D IOC 01/05/05 MG 01/10/04 System E 2006 DISPOSAL 01/11/04 OUT OF SERVICE 01/06/05
  14. 14. StV-5 Capability to Systems Deployment Mapping new Strategic Capability Views d efine the high level capability vision, the capabilities and sub-capabilities (capability functions) required to support that vision, the dependencies between capabilities, the phasing in and out of systems to support the capabilities, and the organizations in which those systems are to be deployed. Source: http://www.modaf.com/ System deployment by echelon level Overlap of systems between epochs PJHQ LCC Plt Div Bde BG Coy Corp JTF Capability 1 Capability 2 Capability 3 Capability 4 System deployment by operational capability category System connectivity and systems involved EPOCH 1 EPOCH 2 EPOCH 3 EPOCH 4
  15. 15. Example DODAF 2.0 New Viewpoints (Overlays) <ul><li>Acquisition – MODAF Acquisition Viewpoint </li></ul><ul><li>JCIDS – MODAF Strategic Capability Viewpoint </li></ul><ul><li>Portfolio Management </li></ul>
  16. 16. DODAF 2.0 Overlays Enterprise Arch Program Arch SoS Arch AV-1 Overview and Summary Information X AV-2 Integrated Dictionary x x x X X OV-1 High Level Operational Concept Graphic ICD, CDD, CPD X OV-2 Operational Node Connectivity Description CDD, CPD X X X OV-3 Operational Information Exchange Matrix x x x CDD , CPD X X X X OV-4 Organizational Relationships Chart x OV-5 Operational Activity Model x x x CDD X X X OV-6a Operational Rules Model x x x CDD X X OV-6b Operational State Transition Description x CDD X OV-6c Operational Event-Trace Description x CDD, CPD X X X OV-7 Logical Data Model x x x X X SV-1 Systems Interface Description x x CDD, CPD X X SV-2 Systems Communications Description x CDD, CPD X X SV-3 Systems-Systems Matrix SV-4 Systems Functionality Description x x X X SV-5 Operational Activity to Systems Function Traceability Matrix SV-6 Systems Data Exchange Matrix CDD X SV-7 Systems Performance Parameters Matrix x X SV-8 Systems Evolution Description SV-9 Systems Technology Forecast SV-10a Systems Rules Model x x X X SV-10b Systems State Transition Description x X X SV-10c Systems Event-Trace Description x X X SV-11 Physical Schema x X X TV-1 Technical Standards Profile x x CPD X TV-2 Technical Standards Forecast EV-1 Metadata View x x x EV-2 Strategic View x x X EV-3 Quality/Financial View x x X Initial Capabilities Document (ICD) Capability Development Document (CDD) May be Required Capability Production Plan (CPP) Required Enterprise Architecture CJCS 3170 JCIDS Requirements DODAF View CJCS 6212 NSS and IT Systems DoD 5000 Federal Acquisition Federal Enterprise Architecture GIG Capstone Requirements Document
  17. 17. Metamodel & Taxonomy-Relationship <ul><li>The metamodel defines Enterprise Architecture concepts </li></ul><ul><li>The taxonomy supports the metamodel, specializing the model elements into more specific items </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Acts as a dictionary of terminology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allows the metamodel to be more generic </li></ul></ul>system equipment platform hosts metamodel Taxonomy A system which has the capability to … weapon system A system which manages the … business system A system which manages the … HR system A system which manages the … accounts system warship aircraft fighter bomber etc …
  18. 18. Distributed Taxonomies <ul><li>OWL is designed for the web: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Allowing references between OWL files at different locations (e.g. synonyms) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allowing one OWL file to specialise definitions in other files </li></ul></ul>Supplier Taxonomy sdfjdsfk nweiewnmn dfldsflmc sdfkmsdm sdf sdf weo 0fhebhn fefwef sdfmdfd sfgsdf sdfsdfgksdfgnf sdfsdofjnsdf sdfhsd eidjjd dsofhsdfoh eee sdadsd wewqf fee Sdfksdj fweewmew ewf DoD Core Taxonomy Sdfjhsdfjhsdf sdfjdsfk nweiewnmn dfldsflmc sdfkmsdm sdf sdf weo 0fhebhn fefwef sdfmdfd sfgsdf sdfsdfgksdfgnf sdfsdofjnsdf sdfhsd eidjjd dsofhsdfoh eee sdadsd wewqf fee Sdfksdj fweewmew ewf DODAF Taxonomy Sdfjhsdfjhsdf sdfjdsfk nweiewnmn dfldsflmc sdfkmsdm sdf sdf weo 0fhebhn fefwef sdfmdfd sfgsdf sdfsdfgksdfgnf sdfsdofjnsdf sdfhsd eidjjd dsofhsdfoh eee sdadsd wewqf fee Sdfksdj fweewmew ewf specialise specialise NATO Taxonomy Sdfjhsdfjhsdf sdfjdsfk nweiewnmn dfldsflmc sdfkmsdm sdf sdf weo 0fhebhn fefwef sdfmdfd sfgsdf sdfsdfgksdfgnf sdfsdofjnsdf sdfhsd eidjjd dsofhsdfoh eee sdadsd wewqf fee Sdfksdj fweewmew ewf AF Equipment Taxonomy Sdfjhsdfjhsdf sdfjdsfk nweiewnmn dfldsflmc sdfkmsdm sdf sdf weo 0fhebhn fefwef sdfmdfd sfgsdf sdfsdfgksdfgnf sdfsdofjnsdf sdfhsd eidjjd dsofhsdfoh eee sdadsd wewqf fee Sdfksdj fweewmew ewf specialise specialise synonym
  19. 19. Data Exchange <ul><li>UML profile and meta-model enable XMI for architecture tool interoperability. </li></ul><ul><li>Elements in the XMI exchange file may refer to relevant taxonomy definitions </li></ul>Tool A Tool B data exchange structure meaning XMI XMI Taxonomy Sdfjhsdfjhsdf sdfjdsfk nweiewnmn dfldsflmc sdfkmsdm sdf sdf weo 0fhebhn fefwef sdfmdfd sfgsdf sdfsdfgksdfgnf sdfsdofjnsdf sdfhsd eidjjd dsofhsdfoh eee sdadsd wewqf fee Sdfksdj fweewmew ewf Taxonomy Sdfjhsdfjhsdf sdfjdsfk nweiewnmn dfldsflmc sdfkmsdm sdf sdf weo 0fhebhn fefwef sdfmdfd sfgsdf sdfsdfgksdfgnf sdfsdofjnsdf sdfhsd eidjjd dsofhsdfoh eee sdadsd wewqf fee Sdfksdj fweewmew ewf META MODEL
  20. 20. XMI for Data Exchange <ul><li>XML is an industry standard </li></ul><ul><ul><li>XMI is XML for model interchange </li></ul></ul><ul><li>UPDM requires XML that conforms to a model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Make use of “vanilla” XMI with heavy use of stereotypes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Specified by extending the UML meta model </li></ul></ul>Meta Object Facility (MOF) UML Meta Model UPDM Meta Model stereotype specifications XMI Spec XMI for UML Stereotypes
  21. 21. Generating the XML Schema <ul><li>For this to work, we need a common way of generating the XML schema from our model </li></ul><ul><li>For this to work with XMI and XML, we need to use the XMI 2.1 XML schema production rules </li></ul><ul><ul><li>… which means the meta-model has to be defined in UML… </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. OMG Specification Process & UPDM Timetable Vote Adoption of a Specification Feb 07 RFP Feb. 05 Initial Submissions June 06 Revised Submission(s) Dec. 06 Evaluate Submission Tools Implementation --April 07 LOI Feb 06 Sept. 05 Issue RFP Evaluate Submissions Need
  23. 23. Relevant Standards <ul><li>Expectation for reuse of relevant existing OMG standards </li></ul><ul><li>Referenced paper that contains analysis of OMG standards </li></ul><ul><li>Referenced AP233 as a transformation mechanism from UML/XMI to DOD’s CADM </li></ul>
  24. 24. Acronyms <ul><li>ADM: The OpenGroup Architecture Driven Methodology </li></ul><ul><li>ADTF: Analysis and Design Task Force </li></ul><ul><li>AP 233: Application Protocol #233 </li></ul><ul><li>C4I DTF: C4I Domain Task Force </li></ul><ul><li>CADM: Core Architecture Data Model </li></ul><ul><li>DODAF: DoD Architecture Framework </li></ul><ul><li>DOTMLPF: doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership & education, personnel, and facilities </li></ul><ul><li>IEEE: Institute of Electrical & Electronic Engineers </li></ul><ul><li>JCIDS: Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System </li></ul><ul><li>LOI: Letter of Intent </li></ul><ul><li>MODAF: Ministry of Defence Architecture Framework </li></ul><ul><li>MOF: Meta-Object Facility (MOF), version 1.4 </li></ul><ul><li>NAF: NATO Architecture Framework </li></ul><ul><li>OMG: Object Management Group </li></ul><ul><li>RFI: Request for Information </li></ul><ul><li>RFP: Request for Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>SEI: Software Engineering Institute-Carnegie Mellon University </li></ul><ul><li>SoS: System Of Systems </li></ul><ul><li>SysML: Systems Modeling Language </li></ul><ul><li>TOGAF: The Open Group Architectural Framework’s </li></ul><ul><li>UML: Unified Modeling Language </li></ul><ul><li>UPDM: DoD and MoD Architecture Frameworks </li></ul><ul><li>XMI: XML Metadata Interchange </li></ul><ul><li>XML: </li></ul>
  25. 25. References <ul><li>Bailey, I., Dandashi, F., Ang, H., Hardy, D. “Using Systems Engineering Standards in an Architecture Framework,” INCOSE Insight Magazine, Vol. 7, Issue 2, July 2004 </li></ul><ul><li>IEEE 1471, “Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software-Intensive Systems,” IEEE, 2000 </li></ul><ul><li>OpenGroup, “Introduction to the Architecture Development Method (ADM),” http://www.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf8-doc/arch/p2/p2_intro.htm </li></ul><ul><li>OpenGroup, “The Open Group Architectural Framework (TOGAF),” www.opengroup.org </li></ul><ul><li>OpenGroup, “TOGAF / MDA Mapping,” White Paper, 16 September 2005, http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?omg/2005-08-01 </li></ul><ul><li>UML Profile for DODAF/MODAF (UPDM) RFP (document dtc/2005-09-12), http://doc.omg.org/dtc/2005-9-12 </li></ul><ul><li>Other information on UPDM: http://syseng.omg.org/UPDM.htm </li></ul>
  26. 26. Additional Slides
  27. 27. OMG Specification Process Summary of the planned stages in the OMG technology adoption process

×