High-Performance InteroperableArchitecture for InformationDominanceGordon A. Hunt – RTI WebinarChief Engineer, RTI • UCS W...
Agenda• High Performance  – It really is about time…• Interoperable Architecture  – What is Interoperability  – Architectu...
So, a little about Performance.     Measure the right thing      for the right reason.
Performance• What can we measure?  –   Message rates  –   Numbers of messages  –   Size of messages  –   Time to process m...
Performance is often Defined by…       Point-to-point, sockets, RPC, RMI       Concerned with an applications individual t...
Performance Does Matter• Impacts Scale   – How big is the System-of Systems going to be?   – Physically can‟t send all the...
Application Behavior Concerns• What data is valid   – Do I have the current value(s), from everyone• How much of the data ...
Managed Performance for Information Dominance         Application                            Application      Quality of S...
An Integration Capability that• Supports Integration of applications and  delivery of consistent behaviors when  –   Envir...
Interoperable Architecture How Do We „Do‟ Interoperability?What does the Architecture look like?
Current Approaches• Protocol Definitions & Standards  – Tell me the messages• Open Architecture Mandates  – Interoperabili...
Is Current Practice Working• Recent studies have shown a growth in interoperability  policy issuance in DoD   – Thousands ...
Pause: What are we Trying to            Achieve?DriverInterchangeability   To put each of (two things) in the place of the...
Levels of Interoperability            -- Technical --System Behavior                Non-Functional NeedCommunication proto...
Levels of Interoperability            -- Syntactic --System Behavior                Non-Functional NeedCommon structure   ...
Levels of Interoperability           -- Semantic --System Behavior               Non-Functional NeedMeaning of data   Sema...
What‟s the Difference?• Semantic definition captures concepts of  – Structure (Content)  – Relationships (Context)  – Time...
Why is this hard? Consider a measure ofcomplexity on applicationdevelopment approaches.
How to Architect Systems to      Achieve Interoperability1. Application Centric: Building Interoperable Apps   – Applicati...
Application Centric Development • Scales O(n) only if     – fully known, distributed, and homogeneous       knowledge of i...
Application Centric Development• Scales O(n2) only if  – each System invokes the Specified Interface of the    System that...
Application Centric Development• Scales O(n3)  – Each system must understand the interaction    patterns and the remote da...
Application Centric Development• Small systems aren‟t the problem, and  they give a false sense of hope.  – This is ~3.5 t...
Application Centric Development• O(n3) Scaling  – ~8 times more    complex                                  24
Message Centric Development• Delegate syntactic  interoperability  – Scales O(n2)  – State is still in Apps               ...
Data-Centric Development• Delegate to middleware  Syntactic and Semantic  Interoperability  – Scales O(n)  – State synced ...
An Interoperable Architecture    HAS a Data-Centric bus and is       Semantically Defined.
What is State?• Things have attributes and  characteristics   – The meeting will run 1:00–2:00 in the                     ...
Data-Centric is Explicit       Understanding of StateWeather ‘Client’                      Weather Service-   Asks for a W...
Example: Data-Centric FlightPlan          Start with a Semantic understanding of FlightPlans          Content is understoo...
Example: Data-Centric FlightPlan                                      Quality of Service                 FlightPlan       ...
[for] Information Dominance  Making it Happen, Steps you           can take…                                32
Challenges for Information           Dominance• Consistent Application Performance  – Regardless of Scale  – Numbers of no...
Data-Centric InfrastructureSupports Information Dominance            Application                            Application   ...
RTI Connext :    Edge-to-Enterprise Real-Time SOA                          Connext Integrator                 Operational ...
RTI Connext™: A Data-Centric       Infrastructure                                                                Discrete ...
Summary• Information Dominance is enabled by  – Access to the right information  – Managed expectations with regards to pe...
Where is StatePoint-to-point, sockets, RPC, RMIState is in the applicationsEach application maintains its view            ...
DownloadConnextFree TrialNOW www.rti.com/downloads
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

High-Performance Interoperable Architecture for Information Dominance

935 views

Published on

To view this webinar:

http://ecast.opensystemsmedia.com/320

Suppliers of C4I, C2, Cyber, ISR and sensor and weapons platforms are challenged to meet commercial pressure from defense procurement for more capability at lower cost, and from acquisition officials for increasing interoperability across their combat systems in order to be able to enable new system capability through Information Dominance (ID).

RTI will present an architecture and its Connext solution, designed to meet these twin imperatives. Built upon proven open technology, Connext is a foundational system architecture that delivers significant productivity gains in integration, while also enabling discovery and rapid assimilation of existing system entities, potentially from 3rd party suppliers or already deployed in the field of operation.

Given the unique requirements of tactical system-of-systems, the architecture must support both real-time combat systems as well as brigade and command HQ enterprise style systems, bringing them together in a scalable, dynamic, and flexible framework. Connext addresses the performance and scale impedance mismatch between these disparate systems types, and delivers the ability to develop a common infrastructure that runs over DIL (Disconnected Intermittent Loss) communications as well as it does over Ethernet, putting minimal strain on the communications interfaces and maximizing information exchange.

The Connext foundation is in use in over 400 defense programs globally with over 350,000 licensed deployments. It has been approved by the US DoD to TRL9 (Technology Readiness Level).

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
935
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
26
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Using a Quality Attribute Methodology, that supports the Business, Non-functional Requirements
  • As systems are added, the number of Interfaces that must be considered increases exponentiallyAs systems are added, the number of Data States that must be considered increases exponentiallyInteroperability between 3 systems is ~3.5 times more complex than between 2 systems
  • High-Performance Interoperable Architecture for Information Dominance

    1. 1. High-Performance InteroperableArchitecture for InformationDominanceGordon A. Hunt – RTI WebinarChief Engineer, RTI • UCS WG Sub-Committee Chair • Commander USN-R
    2. 2. Agenda• High Performance – It really is about time…• Interoperable Architecture – What is Interoperability – Architecture foundations• [for] Information Dominance – Putting it all together – Right time – right data – right place
    3. 3. So, a little about Performance. Measure the right thing for the right reason.
    4. 4. Performance• What can we measure? – Message rates – Numbers of messages – Size of messages – Time to process messages – Number of clients, number of servers – Throughput of a broker/server• Do the measurements matter? – Consider that “Messages” are about something. – What I really care about, is how long it takes to know that something.
    5. 5. Performance is often Defined by… Point-to-point, sockets, RPC, RMI Concerned with an applications individual throughput/latency Bottleneck at the slowest application Little correlation between bus/fabric speeds and system performance Centralized, DB, ESBs Measure the aggregate performance Broker Replication rates, transaction rates ESB Number of supported clients DBMS Generally not measure client performance Decentralized, Data Centric Measures data as presented to the application Measures data update rates (1-1, 1-many, etc.) Measures time to get the consistent state
    6. 6. Performance Does Matter• Impacts Scale – How big is the System-of Systems going to be? – Physically can‟t send all the data everywhere. – Can‟t revisit existing application when adding new capability.• Impacts flexibility of Implementation – Not arbitrarily constrained to messages rates/sizes. – Capability and distribution can be added.• However, the following is required – Applications need to manage their performance requirements – Applications need to manage their behavior explicitly
    7. 7. Application Behavior Concerns• What data is valid – Do I have the current value(s), from everyone• How much of the data do I need – Reliably, only get me date that changes by a little bit – Send me data no faster than this rate• What happens if – I expected an update to data at …, what do you do. – I want an acknowledgement, wait for this long, for this many• I‟m too busy – Old data that I am just getting around to looking at – Are the updates I‟m about to send even valid anymore?
    8. 8. Managed Performance for Information Dominance Application Application Quality of Service Quality of Service (Desired Behaviors,..) (Desired Behaviors,..) Integration Bus for Information DominanceOperational Systems / Tactical Systems Information Technology (IT) Command & Control (C2) DATA-IN_MOTION DATA-AT-REST
    9. 9. An Integration Capability that• Supports Integration of applications and delivery of consistent behaviors when – Environment is ADHOC – Performance concerns are mixed – Scale is unknown – Technologies are mixed• Enables Information Dominance via – Architectural approach that supports a rigorous yet flexible integration methodology that is interoperable across data form/function boundaries
    10. 10. Interoperable Architecture How Do We „Do‟ Interoperability?What does the Architecture look like?
    11. 11. Current Approaches• Protocol Definitions & Standards – Tell me the messages• Open Architecture Mandates – Interoperability on Commonality• Service Oriented Architecture – Stateless services
    12. 12. Is Current Practice Working• Recent studies have shown a growth in interoperability policy issuance in DoD – Thousands of pages of directives, instructions, and mandates – Numerous standards and architecture bodies in the DoD• No Correlation between Increased Interoperability and Standards – Standards are necessary, but not sufficient for interoperability• Conventional means of developing platform, unit command, and theater architectures are complex, manpower intensive, and time consuming. – Achieving Interoperability increases complexity – Complexity of systems-of-systems not understood or well managed – Can‟t make complexity go away, just move where it is
    13. 13. Pause: What are we Trying to Achieve?DriverInterchangeability To put each of (two things) in the place of the other, or to be used in place of each other.Integratability To form, coordinate, or blend into a functioning or unified whole. To incorporate into a larger, functioning or unified whole.Replaceability One thing or person taking the place of another especially as a substitute or successor.Extensibility The ability to add new components, subsystems, and capabilities to a system.Interoperability The ability of systems, units, or forces to provide services to and accept services from other systems, units, or forces, and to use the services so exchanged to enable them to operate effectively together. Open Architecture Requires Interoperability at a Higher Level Than Key Interfaces.
    14. 14. Levels of Interoperability -- Technical --System Behavior Non-Functional NeedCommunication protocol Interchangeability,for exchanging Integrateability,data. Bits & Bytes Replaceability,are exchanged in Extensibility,an unambiguous and Meaningfulmanner. Technical Interoperability
    15. 15. Levels of Interoperability -- Syntactic --System Behavior Non-Functional NeedCommon structure Interchangeability,or data format Integrateability,defined for Replaceability, Syntacticexchanging Extensibility,information. And MeaningfulThis format Technical Interoperabilitymust beunambiguouslydefined.
    16. 16. Levels of Interoperability -- Semantic --System Behavior Non-Functional NeedMeaning of data Semantic Interchangeability,is exchanged Integrateability,via common Replaceability, Syntacticinformation Extensibility,model. And Meaningful InteroperabilityThe meaning Technicalof informationis shared andunambiguouslydefined.
    17. 17. What‟s the Difference?• Semantic definition captures concepts of – Structure (Content) – Relationships (Context) – Time (Behaviors)• This makes the state of the system and the application‟s data – Explicit – Directly Observable – Manageable• Everything has state…
    18. 18. Why is this hard? Consider a measure ofcomplexity on applicationdevelopment approaches.
    19. 19. How to Architect Systems to Achieve Interoperability1. Application Centric: Building Interoperable Apps – Application manages Technical, Syntactic, and Semantic Interoperability2. Message Centric: Building Interoperable Messaging Systems – Delegates Syntactic Interoperability to Messaging Middleware – Application manages Semantic Interoperability3. Data Centric: Building Truly Data Centric Systems – Delegates Semantic Interoperability to Middleware – Open Architecture Requires a Data Centric Approach. 19
    20. 20. Application Centric Development • Scales O(n) only if – fully known, distributed, and homogeneous knowledge of interfaces and state Data State: Color denote uniquenessNode/Service Interface: Colors denote uniqueness 20
    21. 21. Application Centric Development• Scales O(n2) only if – each System invokes the Specified Interface of the System that it wishes to communicate with and no application state – n is the number of interfaces 21
    22. 22. Application Centric Development• Scales O(n3) – Each system must understand the interaction patterns and the remote data state…. – n is the number of data states 22
    23. 23. Application Centric Development• Small systems aren‟t the problem, and they give a false sense of hope. – This is ~3.5 time more „complex‟ than 2 nodes 23
    24. 24. Application Centric Development• O(n3) Scaling – ~8 times more complex 24
    25. 25. Message Centric Development• Delegate syntactic interoperability – Scales O(n2) – State is still in Apps 25
    26. 26. Data-Centric Development• Delegate to middleware Syntactic and Semantic Interoperability – Scales O(n) – State synced with middleware – State IN the middleware and infrastructure – Data-Centric Pub/Sub 26
    27. 27. An Interoperable Architecture HAS a Data-Centric bus and is Semantically Defined.
    28. 28. What is State?• Things have attributes and characteristics – The meeting will run 1:00–2:00 in the “State” (“data”) is a conference room. snapshot of these – My friend‟s phone number is 555-1234 and he‟s currently grooming his cat. attributes and – The car is blue and is traveling north from Sunnyvale at 65 mph. characteristics. – The UAS is performing this mission, with these goals and resources. Best Practice:…whether they exist in the real operate onworld, in the computer, or both state, not dialogs…whether or not we observe or about state.acknowledge them
    29. 29. Data-Centric is Explicit Understanding of StateWeather ‘Client’ Weather Service- Asks for a Weather Report - Stateless Service- Get the current prediction - Provides current weather only when asked State - The fact that I asked, - Where, at a certain time - ‘Somebody’ has to keep it current…
    30. 30. Example: Data-Centric FlightPlan Start with a Semantic understanding of FlightPlans Content is understood – can represent data efficiently Context is understood, know what‟s what…. Dispose New Update New SubscribePublish “AA123” “DL987” “AA123” “AA123” 65.4 56.7 45.6 X 32.1 89.0 78.9
    31. 31. Example: Data-Centric FlightPlan Quality of Service FlightPlan FlightPlan FlightPlan FlightPlan History Deadline Time-Based Filter • Once infrastructure understands objects, can attach behavior (QoS) contracts to them • Data-in-motion behavior includes time perspective SubscribePublish • “Keep only the latest value” or “I need updates at this rate” make no sense unless per-object – Flight AA123 updates shouldn‟t overwrite DL987, even if AA123 is updated more frequently – Update rate for one track shouldn‟t change just because another track appeared
    32. 32. [for] Information Dominance Making it Happen, Steps you can take… 32
    33. 33. Challenges for Information Dominance• Consistent Application Performance – Regardless of Scale – Numbers of nodes, amount of data, data rates…• Dynamic systems‟ topology – No system always on, nodes come and go – Capabilities derived from rapid integration• Disparate Technologies – Different deployment concerns – Different interaction patterns and behaviors• Data-in-Motion and Data-at-Rest – Making at all actionable at the right place & time
    34. 34. Data-Centric InfrastructureSupports Information Dominance Application Application Quality of Service Quality of Service (Time, Performance,..) (Time, Performance,..) Integration Bus for Information Dominance Operational Systems / Tactical Systems Information Technology (IT) Command & Control (C2) DATA-IN_MOTION DATA-AT-REST
    35. 35. RTI Connext : Edge-to-Enterprise Real-Time SOA Connext Integrator Operational Systems Information Technology (IT) Connext Connext Connext Micro DDS MessagingFacilitates cross-organizational integration:• Well-defined and discoverable information models;• Standard data-centric operations• Standard wire interoperability protocol• Mediation: integrate with any interface, expose via any interface
    36. 36. RTI Connext™: A Data-Centric Infrastructure Discrete OT & IT Small Device General-Purpose Apps/Systems DDS Apps Apps Real-Time Apps Pub/Sub API Pub/Sub API Messaging API Adapters Connext Connext Connext Connext Micro DDS Messaging IntegratorRTI DataBus™ Administration Recording Federation Monitoring Replay Transformation Logging Visualization Persistence Common Tools and Infrastructure Services
    37. 37. Summary• Information Dominance is enabled by – Access to the right information – Managed expectations with regards to performance• Access to the right information is facilitated by – The right architecture and description of data – Content, Context, and Behavior• Leveraging the data is facilitated by – Having that data presented to the application in the right form and function – Decoupling the applications view from the infrastructures management of the state
    38. 38. Where is StatePoint-to-point, sockets, RPC, RMIState is in the applicationsEach application maintains its view Centralized, DB, ESBs State is in the Database Broker Managed interactions with state ESB DBMS Decentralized, Data Centric State is in the bus Stateless clients/services State has explicit properties to manage its behavior
    39. 39. DownloadConnextFree TrialNOW www.rti.com/downloads

    ×