nato multi national civil military interoperablity concepts and ifas presentation

Presentation lithouwen

29-10-2010

NATO/EU UNCLASSIFIED1

MULTINATIONAL CIVIL-MILITARY

INTEROPERABILITY (MN CMI)

Mr. Roberto Porta, DOP, MN CMI Project Manager

1st MN CMI Workshop, Brussels 14 June 2011

NC3A Concept


29-10-2010

• Requirements and Constraints

• Approach and Technical Framework

• Solution Development

• Work-Rhythm (example)

• Common and Nationally Funded Activities

• Conclusions and Recommendations

Outline

2 NATO/EU UNCLASSIFIED


29-10-2010

Requirements and

Constraints

3 NATO UNCLASSIFIED


29-10-2010

Type of Crisis or Emergency

– Caused by predictable/un-predictable man-made or natural disasters that

(may) affect the population

– Of significant magnitude involvement by the Military and the International

Community

– With demanding information needs (quality, quantity and real-timeliness)

need for automated Information Systems support

Examples

1. Man-made/acts of terror, e.g. with NATO lead, Nations (mil & civil)

2. Major natural disasters e.g. with UN lead, NATO, EU, IO/NGO, Nations

3. Regional Emergencies e.g. with National lead (mil & civ), Regional (civ)

Context (assumptions)

4 NATO UNCLASSIFIED


29-10-2010

General Problem

NATO UNCLASSIFIED5

Collaboration & Coordination

Environment

Vulnerability

Analysis

Mitigation &

Prevention

Preparedness

Planning

Prediction &

WarningResponse

Recovery

Stabiliza-tion

National Emergency

Management


Environment Preparedness

Planning

Response

Recovery

Stabiliza-tion

UN , EU

Info Systems, Comm &

Collaboration Environment

Preparedness

Planning

Response

Recovery

Stabiliza-tion

NATO

Most players

different at each crisis

Different missions,

RoE ,capabilities &

work approaches

Not interoperable systems

and procedures

(esp. bw civil & miliary)


29-10-2010

AS-IS CIS Situation (notional)

NATO UNCLASSIFIED6

Supporting EMA

UN

EUNATO

Affected EMA

OSOCC

OpCenter

ERC

OpCmd

NGCS

CFCCimicWeb

INTERNET

CECIS

OperationalLevel

Tactical Level

Nation

PWS

PWS

PWS

first responders

population

Fixed

Deployable

Mobile

OpCenter

Pub.

Telecom

GDACS/VOSOCC

DeplCmd

NGO


29-10-2010

Proposed Approach

and Technical Framework

7 NATO UNCLASSIFIED


29-10-2010

Bottom-Up Solution Approach

NATO UNCLASSIFIED8


Environment

Vulnerability

Analysis

Mitigation &

Prevention

Preparedness

Planning

Prediction &

WarningResponse

Recovery

Stabiliza-tion

National Emergency

Management


Environment Preparedness

Planning

Response

Recovery

Stabiliza-tion

UN , EU

Info Systems, Comm &


Preparedness

Planning

Response

Recovery

Stabiliza-tion

NATO

Focus on

Specific Interfaces & Procedures

as enablers. Not on a

comprehensive solution

Building-blocks, re-usable

by each org. in

different scenarios

Application of available and

relatively mature technologies.

No R&D; not a new System

Expected Result:

Technical-operational solutions,

simple to agree & implement


29-10-2010

9 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

TO-BE CIS Situation (notional)

Supporting EMA

UN

EUNATO

Affected EMA

OSOCC

OpCenter

ERC

OpCmd

NGCS

CFCCimicWeb

INTERNET

CECIS

OperationalLevel

Tactical Level

Nation

PWS

PWS

PWS

first responders

population OpCenter

Pub.

Telecom

GDACS/VOSOCC

DeplCmd

NGO

Civil Military Interface

Services (NEC)


29-10-2010

Coordinated Activities & EnablersExamples by Phase

NATO UNCLASSIFIED10

Phase Activities Enablers

Prediction & Warning Warning & Alerting (W&A)

Threat & Risk Assessment

Response Planning

Support request & supply

Common W&A Protocol

Threat Info sharing

Geo/Surveillance info-sharing

Capability supply-request info

Preparedness &

Planning

Long/Mid term Planning.

Plan & Develop Capabilities

Training & Exercises (T&E)

Planning Info Sharing


T&E standard & tools

Response OpCenter/Field coordination

Response deconflict. & coord

Situation Awareness

InteroperableTactical Comm

Real-Time info-sharing

Common Operational Picture

Recovery Damage Assessment

Consequence Management

Logistic & Trasportation

Common Operational Picture

Consq.Man. Cap Info Sharing

Equip./Supplies info sharing

Stabilization Support reconstruction Reconstruction Info Sharing


29-10-2010

Scope Decomposition and Grouping

IFA1 Community of Interest Communication (CIC)

IFA2 Collaboration & Info Sharing Environment (CISE)

IFA3 Warning & Alerting (W&A)

IFA4 Info Sharing Services (ISS)

IFA5 Sit. Awareness & Common Oper. Picture (SAS)

IFA6 Tactical Communication (TACOM)

… …

NATO UNCLASSIFIED11

Interoperability

EnablersGrouped into

Applicable to

Preparedness & Planning

Prediction & Warning

Recovery

Response

…

CIC

CIS

E

SA

S

TA

CO

M

W&

A

ISS

…

Management Phase

Interoperability Focus Areas (IFA)


29-10-2010

Purpose– To decompose the scope into manageable, largely independent

objectives that can be achieved in limited time and produce tangible

results (SMART* goals).

… which become the basis for Agreement, Plan and Program of Work.

… and can be supported by simple interfaces (NEC services)

Preliminary list:1. Community of Interest Info Communication

2. Collaboration and Info Sharing Environment

3. Warning and Alerting

4. Information Sharing Services

5. Situation Awareness & Common Operational Picture

6. Tactical Communication Services

7. …

Interoperability Focus Areas (IFA)


(*) Small, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-based


29-10-2010

Problem– Protecting the info exchange within a COI (unclassified – sensitive).

Independent system authentications not scalable.

Desired Situation and Benefits– An equivalent of a COI-VPN (Virtual Private Network) communication

(to complement public/open info sharing) increases shared trust and

enhances info sharing

Solution Options(a) An actual COI VPN (b) A federation of User Directories

Available Technology– ADFS (for LDAP directories), XML-labelling/guarding.

– Semi-operational ADFS prototype by NC3A.

Relevant Projects– NC3A R&D POW (soon ISAF POW)

IFA01Community of Interest Info Communication



29-10-2010

Problem– Info spread over multiple Info Portals causes collection overhead.

Common protected collaboration space absent (or to be established

at hoc)

Desired Situation and Benefits– Automated feeds (mashup, portal federation) optimized human effort.

– Single protected collaboration space enhances collaboration

Solution Options(a) A single std CISE tool/app (b) a federation of CISE

Available Technology– Web-2 std (RSS-ext, XMPP ..) to be customized and agreed on use

– NC3A Tactical Chat & Collaboration Service Prototypes

Relevant Projects– NC3A R&D POW, NOTS (ISAF)

IFA02Collaboration and Information Sharing Environment



29-10-2010

Problem– No single automated W&A solution across nations/regions and

different security domains and for any type of hazard.

Desired Situation and Benefits– A standard W&A protocol that can be used by any player and in any

situation improves efficiency and effectiveness of response

Solution Options(a) Acquiring a common package (b) implementing W&A standards

Available Technology– Public domain standards (CAP, EDXL, EDXL-ext)

– Existing CAP/EDXL implementation (NC3A and outside)

Relevant Projects– NC3A R&D and ISAF POW, US-DM-OPEN Project, NCOIC

IFA03Warning and Alerting



29-10-2010

Problem– Information Sources possibly sharable in crisis situation within a COI

are not accessible

Desired Situation and Benefits– Sharing of Info Sources within a COI enhances situation awareness

improves efficiency and effectiveness of civ-mil support operations

Solution Options(a) Acquiring a common package (b) adopting & implementing specific

standards & services to enable selective Info Sharing in a COI

Available Technology– Several Web-2 std (ex:WS-I); specific Web-3 std (ex: RDF)

Relevant Projects– NC3A R&D POW

IFA04Information Sharing Services



29-10-2010

Problem– No interoperability for a civ-mil operational/tactical COP limits shared

situation awareness. Manual data entry / shivel chairs not possible in

real-time situation.

Desired Situation and Benefits– (Semi) automated COP feeding for each player/system as enabler

for improved effectiveness and collaboration.

Solution Options(a) Adopting & implementing data and protocol standards for the COP

exchange

Available Technology– Several NATO and Intl. standards (TSO, NFFI, NVG, Asterix)

Relevant Projects– NC3A R&D POW, EU FP6 Oasis

IFA05Situation Awareness & COP*


(*) Common Operational Picture


29-10-2010

Problem– Lack of interoperable, secure and resilient (voice & data)

communication among first responder is major cause of inefficiency

Desired Situation and Benefits– Multiple technologies & profiles adoptable in different scenarios can

greatly improve the effectiveness of first and follow-up responders.

Solution Options(a) An emergency comm. capability for each situation (b) standards and

technologies used in multiple systems

Available Technology– Several int’’l std and technologies (TETRA,SDR, RoIP)

Relevant Projects– NC3A R&D POW, EU FP7 Secricom

IFA06Tactical Communication Services



29-10-2010

Solution Development

19 NATO UNCLASSIFIED


29-10-2010

(For each addressed Interoperability Focus Area):

Interface Specifications• The interoperability standard that each shall implement. • Based on de-iure / de-facto standard (with tailoring/profiling)• E.g.: transport protocols & profiles, data formats.

Standard Operating Procedures• The guidelines, procedures, tactics & techniques that each participant

shall adapt and apply (in accordance to own policies and practices).• E.g.: to establish Communities Of Interest (COI*), release & share info,

disseminate warnings, change alert status, publish information ...

(Prototype) Interface Capabilities• The physical Info Systems Software (and HW) components implementing

the interfaces (e.g. NEC Services). • For validation purposes, for training/exercises or operational employment.• Independently or jointly developed or acquired (COTS, OpenSW)

Expected Deliverables


(*) A COI includes all the players involved in a specific Crisis Management Operation/Phase


29-10-2010

Solution Development


Specification,

development and

validation

Interfacespecification

I/F Capab.(prototype)

StandardProcedures

Baseline Technology– Mature at least for demonstration and system

development (TRL* > 5)

– E.g. from NATO/NC3A R&D, EU FP’s, National

R&D or existing product/applications

Skills and Expertise– NC3A can pick and offer support from a base of

40+ scientist & 7+yrs POW in CMI-related areas

– Methodology extensively applied by NC3A for

C4ISR interoperability can be largely re-used

Facilities– Local (at NC3A-NLD) test & development or

distributed (through lab networking / web-apps)

– Real and virtual conferencing

(*) Technology Readiness Level (on a scale 1 to 9)


29-10-2010

• Essential for developing or enhancing capabilities:– Increases the degree of shared trust

– Compresses capability engineering and fielding cycles

• Allows closer collaboration with the Industry and increase its

awareness of CMI requirements & operational context.

• Can reuse existing infrastructure & relevant TV&V Programs.– E.g. Distributed Networked Battle Labs (DNBL) and Testing Env. (DTE);

Coalition Warrior Interoperability Exercise (CWIX)

Most existing (military) TV&V initiatives are focused on C4ISR; limited

participation and some difficulty in access by Civil Organizations

TV&V is an essential part of the MN CMI scope


Test, Verification and Validation (TV&V)


29-10-2010

Training and Exercises (T&E)


• Essential for full implementation of capabilities, for maintaining

the required readiness levels and to build shared trust.

• ManyT&E Programs/Events relevant for CMI exist e.g.– NATO/EAPC (CEP POW) - Civil Emergency Exercises

– Other NATO/PfP civ-mil live & simulated T&E (SeeSim,Viking,

SteadFast …)

– Regional and National Emergency T&E Programs

T&E is not included in MN CMI scope: MN CMI resuts

are used to enable and support existing T&E events


29-10-2010

NATO National, Local (Civ & Mil)

UN,EU,IGO, NGO

IMP

LE

M.

Civ-Military

Exercises &

Training

CIS/C4ISR

Exercises, Test

& Training

Overall Capability Implementation

MN CMI

CWIX, ... Civ.Em Ex,...

Specific.,

develop & valid.

Interfacespecification

I/F Capab.(prototypes)

Technically oriented Operationally oriented

StandardProcedures

NATO UNCLASSIFIED24

SP

EC

IFIC

AT

ION

&

VA

LID

AT

ION

Operations

DE

PL

OY.

Revised Spec &

Implementation

Requirements &

Lessons Learned

PLANNING


29-10-2010

Work-Rhythm

(example)



29-10-2010

Year Work-plan- example

POW

NATO UNCLASSIFIED26

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Plenary Conference: Yr+1 Agreem.

--

Virtual Conf : POW finalization

--

Main Planning Conference

--

Virtual Conf : Design Review

Virtual Conf : Test Review

--

Execution Conference

--

Virtual Conf : Assess & reporting

Plenary Conference: POW Assess’t

Validation

Results &

Assessment

Detailed Plan

Preparation

Notes– 3 Physical Conferences; 3+ Virtual conferences

– All distributed testing. NC3A as test hub and support

Agreement

D&

Dev

Valid

ate

Assess

Pla

n


29-10-2010

Operations

Multi-year Work-plan- example

TV&V

NewCooperation

Initiatives

Operational

RequirementsTechnology..

.

NewEmergencies

Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5

POW (Yr-1 & 2)•IFA01 (incr.1)•IFA02

POW (Yr-3 & 4)•IFA01 (incr.2)•IFA03•IFA04 (incr 1)

POW (Yr-5)•IFA05•IFA06•IFA04 (incr 2)

PO

W

NATO UNCLASSIFIED27

T&E


29-10-2010

Common and Nationally*

Funded Activities


(*) “Nation” to be intended also as National or International Organization


29-10-2010

• The Program of Work (POW) is decomposed into discrete

Objective Capabilities (e.g. IFA’s)

• Each IFA is supported by two or more Nations and can be

addressed in one or more years.

• National efforts for the POW of interest are funded by each

Nation.

• Program Management, Technical Consultancy, Support,

Infrastructure is provided by NC3A under Program

Common Funding.

• NC3A can also support the analysis, development and

testing of specific IFA (as under POW agreements)

Common and Nationally Funded ActivitiesProposed Approach



29-10-2010

IFA

06

IFA

02

IFA

05

IFA

04

IFA

01

IFA

03


Common and National FundingExample

Program Management & Support,

Technical Consultancy & Support, Organiz. (NC3A)

Conference, Meeting & Testing Facilities

Local IT, Networks (NC3A)

Common

Funded

NATO

Funded

ORG-1

Funded

ORG-2

Funded

ORG-3

Funded

Legend

Not

Funded

MN CMI

ECECI


29-10-2010

• NC3A is a Customer-funded Organization.

• A minimum Common Funding level is required to financially

sustain this initiative from the NC3A perspective.

• A minimum of 4 funding stakeholders (e.g. on a POW

including 2-3 IFAs) for Year-1 is expected to be sufficient to

kick-off the initiative.

Common and Nationally Funded ActivitiesFinancial feasibility



29-10-2010

Conclusions and

Recommendations



29-10-2010

Conclusions

– Preliminary concept only: to be revised by Stakeholders

– The overall problem is complex. Technical interoperability is not

sufficient but is an important enabler.

– MN CMI addresses technical-operational interoperability with a

pragmatic, incremental bottom-up approach.

– NC3A has the right skills and expertise to make this happen.

– Eventual use of deliverables in the hands of each participant.

Recommendations– Agreement and direction (asap), commitment and funding

(afterward) by the Stakeholders is needed to continue

Conclusions & Recommendations



29-10-2010

1. Is there a general interest by your Organization in

participating and sponsoring this Initiative ?

2. What is your potential scope of interest (e.g. which IFA) ?

3. Which are specific suggestions or recommended for a

revision or detailing of the scope?

4. Is - in principle - a commitment by your Organization

achievable in 2011 ?

Questions to the participants



29-10-2010

NATO UNCLASSIFIED35

Thank you !

Questions ?

[email protected]

+31-70-3743576 (Netherlands)

mailto:[email protected]

nato multi national civil military interoperablity concepts and ifas presentation

Documents