Strategic Opportunities Symposium, Extensible Modeling and Simulation Framework (XMSF)

1. Strategic Opportunities Symposium,Extensible Modeling and Simulation Framework (XMSF) Don Brutzman and Michael Zyda Naval Postgraduate School Mark Pullen, George Mason University (GMU) Katherine L. Morse, SAIC

2. Today’s Program • XMSF Technical Workshop Report • Overview, Web/XML: Dr. Don Brutzman NPS • Internet/networking: Dr. Mark Pullen GMU • Modeling & Simulation: Dr. Katherine Morse SAIC • Defense impact: Dr. Mike Zyda NPS • Technologist Perspectives • Warfighter Perspectives • Programmatic Perspectives • Discussion ... and lunch ! XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

3. Session agenda: XMSF Workshop • Workshop planning, motivations, precepts • Workshop structure and participants • Technical and (some) business considerations • Workshop conclusions • Overall • Internet/Networking • Modeling & Simulation • Web/XML • Impacts and implications XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

4. XMSFTechnical Challenges Workshop • Monterey California USA, 19-20 August 2002 • preceding annual NPS MOVES Open House • Goal: initial technical survey and assessment • Modeling & Simulation via Web technologies feasible? • XMSF white paper provided basis for discussion • Report back to this group for strategic planning • Diverse technical experts invited • Web/XML, Internet/network, Modeling & Simulation • Point papers for undiluted snapshot of key ideas XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

5. XMSF motivations • Web-based technologies can provide an extensible modeling and simulation architecture, to support a new generation of interoperable applications • Simulation support is needed for operational warfighting capabilities • XML-based architecture can provide a bridge between emerging rehearsal/reality/replay requirements and open/commercial Web standards • Web = best tech strategy + best business case XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

6. Problems • Current approaches are not compatible with effective use of emerging Web technologies • Military modeling & simulation has little or no apparent impact on warfighters’ daily tactical operations • Diverse simulations do not scalably interoperate with warfighting systems • Global systems are not yet possible without connection to common interoperable framework • physical and logical “stovepipes” prevent this XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

7. Motivation • Transformational technologies are needed to scale up defense modeling/simulation to meet real-world needs • Can we use Web technologies as common framework? • Dynamic capabilities, open standards, Web business model provide lift to support government and commercial success • Easy use and open extensibility for developers and users, fueling rapid growth of interoperable simulations • Bring defense modeling/simulation/tactical support into mainstream of enterprise-wide best-business practices XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

8. XMSF project bootstrap strategy • Outline large-scale next-generation framework • Simulation interoperability via Web technologies • Enumerate technology, languages, specifications • Workshop of key researchers to refine requirements • Seek broad feedback for consensus, focus, progress • Demonstrate how new capabilities might help • Current war effort against terrorism, homeland defense • Government, science, commerce, education, commerce, etc. • Multi-year simulation initiative via Web approach? • Workshop & symposium produce strategy, white paper • Conceptual applications demos at I/ITSEC in December • NPS, GMU, SAIC have started, shared strategies welcome XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

9. Related work: workshop on software componentization • July 2002, DMSO, DC • two dozen attendees, POC Phil Zimmerman • slidesets and conclusions available soon • Consensus seemed to be: • components are a worthwhile approach to consider for improving composability and interoperability of diverse interacting simulations • component technology is sufficiently mature and well defined for building exemplars XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

10. Planning for change, quick start • Technical Challenges Workshop • NPS, August 19-20, focused expert efforts • Strategic Opportunities Symposium • George Mason University, September 6 – welcome! • Immediately precedes SIW for good participation • Broader feedback: right track? what else is needed? • Exemplar Demonstrations • I/ITSEC demos, Orlando Florida December 2-5 • Next steps for XMSF … • another workshop this fall? what else is needed? XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

11. Technical Challenges Workshop Structure, approach, details

12. Workshop strategy 1 • How to solve big problems? Divide & conquer. • Three perspectives • Web technologies, XML • Internet and Networking • Modeling and simulation (M&S) • White paper lays out initial basic framework • please use, extend, correct, disagree XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

13. Workshop strategy 2 • How to solve big problems? Divide & conquer. • Triage approach for all three technical areas: • What do we agree on: determine consensus • What do we disagree on: more work needed • What are most important directions for further work • Document workshop and symposium results • Most important outcomes may be education, direction XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

14. Moderator: Dr. Don Brutzman, NPS Erik Chaum NUWC Rob Glidden Sun Jack Jackson, TRAC Monterey Dr. David Kwak, MITRE Recorders: Steve Fouskarinis SAIC, Curt Blais NPS Dr. Francisco Loaiza, IDA Dr. Edward Sims, Vcom3D Dr. Chenghui Luo, Fraunhofer CRCG Phil Zimmerman, DMSO Web/XML group XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

15. Moderator: Dr. Mark Pullen, GMU Dr. Rusty Baldwin, AFIT Scott Bradner, IESG, Harvard Dr. Suleyman Guleyupoglu, NRL Dr. Sue Numrich, DMSO Recorders: Don McGregor, NPS Dave Laflam, AMSO Denny Moen GMU Dr. Steve Carson, GSC Assoc. Dr. Norbert Schiffner, CRCG Dr. Marcelo Zuffo, University Sao Paolo two last-minute drops Dr. Sandeep Singhal Reefedge Dr. Mikel Petty ODU Internet/networking group XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

16. Moderator: Dr. Katherine Morse, SAIC Dr. Mike Bailey USMC TECOM Dr. Paul Diefenbach, OpenWorlds Dr. Niki Deliman Goerger, USA ERDC Alan Hudson, Yumetech Recorders: Joerg Wellbrink, NPS Simon Goerger, NPS Dr. Kalyan S. Perumalla, Georgia Inst. of Technology Dr. Dick Puk, Intelligraphics Dr. Cristina Russo dos Santos, Eurecom, University Toulon Dr. Andreas Tolk, ODU Dr. Sanjeev Trika, Intel Modeling & simulation group XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

17. XMSF website, report • Position papers and slides available at • http://www.movesInstitute.org/xmsf • Participants can improve/amend contributions • Report revision dates: September 1 and 8 XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

18. Position paper revisions • Feel free to reconsider and modify points • but little need for duplication • clarity is key • lots of references and URLs, please • Will provide position papers with final report. XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

19. Initial technical positions

20. Application Domains • Discrete-event and constructive simulations • Virtual worlds and continuous simulations • Multi-agent systems • Interactive, man-in-the-loop, equipment-in-loop systems • Live and virtual entities, mixed seamlessly • Distance learning for interaction among participants • Audio and video (both needed for WAN testing anyway) • Multiformat whiteboard; recording and playback • Teaching and training compatibility via ADL SCORM • Simulations usable for training, also training for simulation use XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

21. Top-Level Requirements 1 • Ability to interact directly and scalably over the network • Compatible with Web architecture and technologies • Highly distributed • Not necessarily connected to Web, but using Web technologies • Use by humans and software agents equally important • Support for composable, reusable model components • Root data-structure representations specified using XML schema • Representations in other languages autogenerated directly • Connection point between syntax and RDF Schema, semantics XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

22. Top-Level Requirements 2 • Simple learning curve and repeatable examples • Support users and developers • Modular structure • Ability to directly interact with network layer • Plug-ins connecting into kernel plug-ins at run time • Standards-based • IEEE, ISO, W3C, IETF, Web3D • Integrate with tactical systems • Augment group shared picture of operations • Producers and consumers • System life-cycle patterns, repeatability XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

23. Top-Level Requirements 3 • Support for XML and multiple programming languages • Dynamically extensible at run time: “always on” • software + hardware, diversity includes backwards compatibility • loose coupling, verification/validation, repair, graceful degradation, redundancy, etc. • Security levels consistent with current Web technology • Public library of useful reusable components • Cross-platform capabilities • Rendering support and architectural hooks for visual simulations XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

24. Top-Level Requirements 4 • Expected computer performance: • Small, fast, inexpensive computers • Reconnect via GRID computing (distributed operating systems) • Expected network performance: • Modems through ADSL (0.05-1.5 Mbps) for limited participation • 10 - 1Gbps for local participation • OC3 up through gigabit wide-area networking • Backward compatibility with existing architectures and protocols, where it makes sense • e.g. DIS, HLA/RTI, ALSP, probably many others XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

25. M&S Functional Requirements • Backward compatibility • Authoritative representations • Composability • Multi-resolution modeling • Tactical system integration • Simulation support services • Time management • Logging and playback XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

26. Business model considerations Initial discussions

27. Business Model 1 • Minimal architecture includes open-source implementation • Royalty-free enabler, usable without any fee restrictions whatsoever • Important to have two or more interoperable implementations • Commercial implementations profitably augment open source • Long-term stable infrastructure enables sustainable business models • Flexible architecture broadens market: not “just” military simulation, also full World Wide Web via open/secure Internets • Web-enabled architecture allows more sponsors to participate, which allows simulations, models, and applications to survive despite intermittent funding profiles • Transferable career-building skills and reusable experience for programmers and managers XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

28. Business Model 2 • Commercial models in partnership with open-source • Support • Offer programming skill for a fee and give up rights to the source if it is infrastructure related. • Proprietary software • A vendor may write a simulator that runs on top of the free infrastructure. They can use any license they like on this and sell it as they see fit. • Consulting • Someone needs to put together the simulations. Even if all the parts are free, this is a salable service. • Maintenance • Numerous success stories exist. • Success of the overall endeavor is key to business success. XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

29. DoD Business Model • Commercial technology is crucial • We can’t do it alone • Specialized technology requirements harmful • Translate into always spending too much for unique, outdated technology • Nothing succeeds like success • Slipstreaming standards and industry “best practices” makes best sense for industry partners too XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

30. Workshop Conclusions

31. Observations • Significant agreement, consensus on principles • Web technologies for networked modeling & simulation appears to be feasible • Lots of different ideas about how to execute • few (if any) contradictions XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

32. Conclusions 1, 2 • Close working relationship across all three component areas will continue to be needed • Web Technologies / XML, Networking, and M&S • Benefit from broad technical insights • Interrelated goals and concerns • XMSF concept must continue to be refined from a high-level concept to definitive technical recommendations, practices, and applications XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

33. Conclusions 3, 4 • Need exemplar applications identified, initiated • Collectively and clearly demonstrate the application potential of XMSF concepts • A number of existing and emerging programs were discussed as possible contexts for the exemplars • Web Services appear are promising area for focusing future work • synopsis to follow XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

34. Conclusions 5 • Security concerns are cross-cutting for all areas, must be addressed throughout design process • or unforeseen vulnerabilities occur • Approximately equal number of Web-related technical challenges & solutions presented • Likely feasible but recurring throughout lifecycle • Independent of classical physical/military security • Additional group-specific topics follow. XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

35. Web/XML group Don Brutzman moderator

36. Web Group summary • Many issues to consider, listed in workshop report, group notes and individual point papers • W3C has done the heavy lifting already, there are many languages and specifications which work well together today • Web Services architectures: promising approach to organize all this capability in an actionable way XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

37. Web Services XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

38. Internet/networking group Mark Pullen moderator

39. EXtensible Modeling and Simulation Framework XMSF Symposium 9/6/2002George Mason University, Fairfax Virginia Network Area Mark Pullen

40. XMSF Position • Web-based technologies have the capability to support scalable interoperability of the spectrum of DoD models and simulations including constructive, virtual, and live as well as integrating legacy simulation frameworks and the increasingly important distance-learning technologies. XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

41. Precondition for Success • Leaders and workers from the three major technical areas (Web, Internet, M&S) must work as a coordinated team • with effective (human) interfaces among all elements • we have learned that it does not work to “throw it over the wall” ! • solutions need to work end-to-end XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

42. Working Group Focus WEB/XML Data Representation Service Description Graphical User Interface Description State Transition Description Security Paradigm Transactions Ontologies Repositories Search Engines NETWORKING End-to-end QoS Many-to-many Multicast Streaming Multimedia Network Monitoring Negotiation of QoS Object Request Broker Group Coordination Middleware Session Coordination Middleware MODELING & SIMULATION Backward Compatibility Authoritative Representations Composability Multi-resolution modeling Tactical System Integration Simulation Support Services XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

43. Web Technologies / XML • Requires aggressive reliance on commercial technologies and active engagement with their standards development groups such as IETF, ISO, W3C, IEEE, and Web3D. • Adaptive, cross-platform capabilities will be a given XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

44. Networking WG • Scott Bradner, Harvard & IESG • Dr. Suleyman Guleyupoglu, NRL • Dr. Sue Numrich, DMSO • Dr. Norbert Schiffner, Fraunhofer CFCG • Dr. Marcelo Zuffo, U. of Sao Paulo, Brazil • Dr. Steve Carson, GSC Associates • NOTE: We had good agreement on all issues, possibly because the technologies we considered are more mature. XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

45. Networking WG • Working assumptions: • The simulation will not be confined to individual networks • either private networks individual ISPs • Application should not be media-aware • Must be able to run over the public Internet • without this, can’t achieve the benefits of XMSF to commercial industry • then defense can’t enjoy them either! • Scalability and resilience are essential in XMSF XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

46. Network QoS: meets a specified or negotiated standard for: • capacity, latency, jitter, loss in a statistical sense • can be done today in general terms within individual ISP networks • also Internet-wide by proactive path selection • a workable approach to defining consistency needs of applications * • e.g. does the application need to know order of sending • this requires translation from application requirements to network capabilities * early work project XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

47. Network QoS continued • must define acceptable tradeoff between reliability and latency in a parameterized form * • if a negotiated solution, mechanism(s) for negotiation needed • could be different for global and local negotiation • we don’t know how to do Internet-wide QoS negotiation XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

48. M&S must characterize network requirements • and the impact if the requirements are not met • this implies they must be measured and understood * • cannot assume any-to-any communication • firewalls and network address translation (NAT) get in the way • application or middleware should be able to adapt to take advantage of changing network capacity * • implies higher layer must be aware of available capacity • must define security requirements: • authentication, denial of service protection, confidentiality, auditing, integrity XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

49. Many-to-many multicast • trend is away from providing this as a network layer capability - no good business model • one-to-many may become available • must define requirements for reliability * • e.g. selectively reliable/real-time, fully reliable/non-real-time • it is impossible to have fully reliable/real-time multicast • identifying and responding to congestion is a requirement • it will be necessary to support M&S needs for networked group communication over non-multicast network layer * XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium

50. Thoughts from networking community • In general the simulation network could be an overlay network * • for example, virtual private network (VPN) • allows an ISP or the Internet to meet specialized requirements of M&S • Need a capability for end-to-end network status & performance monitoring * • this also can be done in an overlay network • Standardize on over-the-net protocols • riding over standard Internet protocols • proven basis for enabling interoperability XMSF Strategic Opportunities Symposium