Reuse Versus Reinvention **. Mary Ann Malloy, PhD email@example.com LFM 2008 Conference. ** How Will Formal Methods Deal with Composable Systems?. Composable C2 needs Formal Methods!. As a public interest company, MITRE works in partnership with the U.S. government to address
Mary Ann Malloy, PhD
LFM 2008 Conference
** How Will Formal Methods Deal with Composable Systems?
works in partnership with the U.S. government to address
issues of critical national importance.
“A mechanism to enable access to one or more capabilities, where the access is provided using a prescribed interface and is exercised consistent with constraints and policies as specified by the service description.”
– DoD Net-Centric Services Strategy
Ability to sort by type of incident, date, location, etc.
Worldwide threats and incidents: airport, chemical, bridge, railway, bombs, etc. It also has links to related news stories and a searchable database.
Listing of bomb-related events between 14 Feb 08 and 15 Feb 08
“A paradigm for organizing and utilizing distributed capabilities that may be under the control of different ownership domains.”
– OASIS Reference Model for Service-Oriented Architecture
Composable solutions – the desired end-state of a full-scale SOA implementation – are the direction DoD, federal stakeholders & commercial enterprises are evolving their automation assets.
** see http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2005systems/thursday/pack2.pdf
Is this practicable across all of DoD?
DoD may need to stand up multiple access points for heavily used services / compositions; and the “sweet spot” will likely differ in times of war vice times of peace.
1) Developers provide design-level specifications of model and policy documents (as input to Cauldron) and a test plan (XTBL).
2) Cauldron creates a provisioning and deployment plan for the application.
3) Mulini generates staging plan from the input components referred to from XTBL (dashed arrows).
4) Deployment tools deploy the application, monitoring tools to the staging environment.
5) The staging is executed.
6) Data from monitoring tools is gathered for analysis.
7) After analysis, developers adjust deployment specifications or possibly even policies and repeat the process.
** see http://www.static.cc.gatech.edu/systems/projects/Elba/pub/200604_NOMS_mulini.pdf
POC: Ms. Janet McDonald
(520) 538-3575 (DSN 879)
PM ITTS IMO – Ft. Huachuca
Key component of the Electronic Proving Ground Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) tool kit for live distributed test environments.
Provides a “threads-based” composable environment to plan, generate planning documents, verify configuration, initialize, execute, synchronize, monitor, control, and report the status of sequence of activities.
Freely available & customizable to any problem domain.
Complexity may be a barrier.
For a composition that will only be used a few times, can we tolerate higher risk?
Risk (e.g., loss of life)
as-is for composable C2
Can we “rate” the composability of components?
DoD will continue to deploy composed solutions to realize its SOA vision.
Current testing focuses more on the level of service provided and less on how reliably the capability is delivered or whether it actually meets the need.
Different levels of testing are probably appropriate for different contexts (“static” versus “dynamic,” use frequency, loss-of-life consequences).
Automated environments are needed to test composed solutions targeted for rapid deployment
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
Solutions are built from primitive and composite components and connectors.
Components and connectors can be described by interface and protocol specifications.
Common patterns provide abstractions we may be able to exploit in design, development, analysis and testing.
To delivery meaningful capability, the components must be composable regarding their underlying ideas
A capability is realized through a pre-defined orchestration of services
A single system with a non-flexible hierarchical structure
Services are orchestrated on an ad-hoc basis to deliver a capability…and then disappear
A system consisting of several independently functional but integrated components
Reusable, “mobile” services
1 2 3 4 5 6Another view: stages of SOA adoption
DoD is lurking around here
Business Process Understanding: How is the work done?
Infrastructure (ESB, Registry, Management Governance: How will services, application, people interact and communicate?
SOA Design/ Determination: What should be a service?
SOA Enablement (Java EE, .NET, federated data services): How will application and data services be developed and deployed?
IT Assessment: What IT assets exist supporting the business process?
Process Orchestration/ Composition: How will business processes and rules be developed and deployed?
** Mark Driver, Optimizing Open Source and SOA Strategies, Gartner Application Architecture, Development & Integration Summit 2007, http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=506878&tab=overview