1

Enterprise ArchitectureUnified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM)Strategies, Policy, Governance, and Implementation

DoD and Federal Departments15 July 2011

Walt OkonSenior Architect Engineer

Architecture & Infrastructure DirectorateOffice of DoD CIOwalt.okon@osd.mil

703-607-0502

Future of Architecture

Secure Information Sharing

It is imperative to effectively securely exchange information among components, Federal agencies, coalition partners, foreign governments and international organizations as a critical element of our efforts to defend the nation and execute national strategy

Effectively Securely Exchange Information

Secure Information Sharing

The use of architecture techniques ensures alignment, clarity, and interoperability across information sharing initiatives; Information Sharing Environment (ISEs))

Architectures enable Departments and agencies to eliminate redundancies by identifying information sharing services that may be implemented and shared internal to DoD and, potentially, across the Federal Government.

Architectures Enabled

Secure Information Sharing

DoD is implementing services for IS that employs Enterprise Services (ES) including service registration, authentication, attribute‐based access control, directory services, metadata registration, federated search, and collaboration.

DoD partnering with IC on initiatives; e.g., service definition and implementation, metadata descriptions, Universal Core context‐independent framework, and cross‐domain solutions.

Elements of Quality Architecture

Common Architecture Framework Approach

• Single Architecture Framework

• Policy, Direction, Guidance

• Exchange

• Architecture Tools

• Certified Architects

Enabling efficient and effective

acquisition of hardware, software and

services used by DoD in missions

DoDAF V2.0 Viewpoints Fit-For Purpose

Architecture viewpoints are composed of data that has been organized to facilitate understanding. 6

All V

iewp

oin

t

Ov

era

rch

ing

as

pe

cts

of a

rch

itec

ture

co

nte

xt th

at re

late

to a

ll m

od

els

Data an

d In

form

ation

View

po

int

Artic

ula

te th

e d

ata

rela

tion

sh

ips

an

d a

lign

me

nt s

truc

ture

s in

th

e a

rch

itec

ture

co

nte

nt

Stan

dard

s View

po

int

Artic

ula

te a

pp

lica

ble

Op

era

tion

al, B

us

ine

ss

, Tec

hn

ica

l, an

d

Ind

us

try p

olic

y, sta

nd

ard

s, g

uid

an

ce

, co

ns

train

ts, a

nd

fo

rec

as

ts

Systems Viewpoint

Articulate the legacy systems or independent systems, their composition,

interconnectivity, and context providing for, or supporting, DoD functions

Services Viewpoint

Articulate the performers, activities, services, and their exchanges providing for,

or supporting, DoD functions

Operational Viewpoint

Articulate operational scenarios, processes, activities & requirements

Capability Viewpoint

Articulate the capability requirement, delivery timing, and deployed capability

Pro

ject View

po

int

De

sc

ribe

s th

e re

latio

ns

hip

s b

etw

ee

n o

pe

ratio

na

l an

d c

ap

ab

ility

req

uire

me

nts

an

d th

e v

ario

us

pro

jec

ts b

ein

g im

ple

me

nte

d;

De

tails

de

pe

nd

en

cie

s b

etw

ee

n c

ap

ab

ility m

an

ag

em

en

t an

d th

e

De

fen

se

Ac

qu

isitio

n S

ys

tem

pro

ce

ss

.

DoD Architecture Framework 2.0

• What it is:– Guidance on the types of data and

relationships needed to document a DoD architecture in a standard way (new in 2.0)

– Guidance on format and content for a standard set of DoDAF Described Models for describing architectures

– High level meta-process for using the DoDAF• What it isn’t:

– A specific architecture– A tool– A detailed architecture development process

7

8

DoDAF V2.0 Vision

Views for the Architect

Structured Knowledge Base – Common Model

Views for Other Stakeholders

Levels of Architecture

9

Solution Level Architectures

Segment Level Architectures

Enterprise Level Architectures

DoD Enterprise

Capability Based

System ContextSoS ArchitecturesFoS Architectures

http://www.defenselink.mil/cio-nii/sites/diea/

10

UPDM – Unified Profile for DoDAF/MODAF

Adaptive

Artisan Software

ASMG

BAE Systems

DoD

DND

embeddedPlus

Generic

IBM

Thales

Lockheed Martin CoMitreL3 CommsMOD

NoMagic

Raytheon

Rolls Royce

Sparx Systems

VisumPoint

Selex

UPDM RFC Group

Walt OkonDoD Support

Why do we need Exchange

UCore

“The bottom line is this:  The U.S. government had sufficient information to have uncovered this plot and potentially disrupt the Christmas Day attack.  But our intelligence community failed to connect those dots, which would have placed the suspect on the "no fly" list.

In other words, this was not a failure to collect intelligence; it was a failure to integrate and understand the intelligence that we already had. ”

President Barack Obama, 05 JAN 2010

11 Sep 2001 Terrorist Attacks

Haiti Earthquake

Hurricane Katrina

Japan Earth Quake,

Tsunami, Nuclear Risks

Middle East Pro-Democracy

Movements

Christmas Day Terrorist Attempt

DoD and IC Information Sharing

Initiatives

DOJ/DHS Experience in Federal, State, Local, Tribal Interoperability

ImplementLessonsLearned

To Achieve OperationallySignificant

Results

Federal Inter-Agency

State, Civil, Local

Coalition Partners

NGOs and Industry

What is UCore

Message Framework Metadata

When What

Where

Who

• XML representation Interrogatives: When, Where, Who, What,

• What Taxonomy• Common Terms

• Security markings • Message framework• Rendering Instructions• Extension Guidance

UCore V2.0 Conceptual Data Model

Architecture Tools

• Guidance– DoDAF v2.0 – Federated Architecture Strategy– DoD IEA

• DoD Tools– DoD Architecture Registry System (DARS)– DoD IT Standards Registry (DISR)– GIG Technical Guidance (GTG) Tool– Meta Data Repository (MDR)

Vendor Tools are Necessary

Architecture Education & Training

Common Architecture Framework

Certified Enterprise Architects

design the information

technology architecture

structure enabling the efficient

and effective acquisition of

hardware, software and services

utilized by the DoD in missions

supporting the warfighters.

Elements of Quality Architecture

Common Architecture Framework Approach

• Single Architecture Framework

• Policy, Direction, Guidance

• Exchange

• Architecture Tools

• Certified Architects

Enabling efficient and effective

acquisition of hardware, software and

services used by DoD in missions

deliverables.

Future of Architecture

Achieving Secure Information Sharing

Information Integration SubcommitteeIdentity Federation Meeting

Implement ICAM

Identity, Credential, and Access Management

Unclassified 18

Federal CIO Council

ICAM Alliances: Interagency Security Committee, NSTIC NPO, CNSS, IC IdAM, NASCIO, & More

Secure Information Sharing

Extract from FY10: Leveraging the Power of Technology

• To support this effort, the Federal Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM) segment architecture provides Federal agencies with a consistent approach for managing the vetting and credentialing of individuals requiring access to Federal information systems and facilities

• The ICAM segment architecture will serve as an important tool for providing awareness to external mission partners and drive the development and implementation of interoperable solutions

Secure Information Sharing

Extract from FY12: IT Security and Privacy• Improve Identity Management: ICAM, PIV

Credentials, HSPD-12, NSTIC• ICAM solutions leverage existing investments

in the Federal Government while promoting efficient use of tax dollars when designing, deploying, and operating information technology systems

• With the majority of the Federal work- force now possessing credentials, agencies can accelerate their use of these for secure access to Federal facilities and information systems

Lo

gic

al A

cces

sP

hys

ical

Acc

ess

Unclassified 21

ICAM ScopeP

erso

ns

No

n-P

erso

ns

22

Current DOD IdAM Attribute Governance

Secretary of Defense (SECDEF)Identity Protection Mgt

Sr. Coord Group

(IPMSCG)& working

groups

DOD CIO

DoD CIO Executive Board

Enterprise Guidance Board (EGB)

IA Enterprise Review Group (IAERG)

Enterprise Services Review Group (ESRG)

Architecture Standards Review Group (ASRG)

Information Assurance Senior Leaders (IASL)

Identity Access Mg

t Task Force (IdAM TF)&

working groups

Identity Assurance &

PKI

(IdA/PKI)

Directorate

Defense Information

Systems Agency (DISA)

Joint Staff

GFM DI GOSC

GFM DI PIPWG

OUSD Personnel & Readiness

(P&R)Defense Human

Resources Agency (DHRA)Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC)

DOD/IC Authorization Attribute Steering Committee AASC

Federal CIO Council(FICAM

Subcommittee)

Legend for governance light blue: DOD organizations

dark blue: DOD governance bodiesgrey: DOD/IC governance bodiesblack: federal governance bodies

Architecture & Information Sharing

Achieving Secure Information Sharing

Office of Management and Budget

Common Approach Federal Enterprise Architecture (CA-FEA)

Dr. Scott Bernard, Federal Chief Architect

Changes in Federal Direction

Mission. Federal enterprise architects provide leading-edge advisement, analysis, and design services that align strategic priorities with mission capabilities and technology solutions.

Vision. To be a trusted, knowledgeable partners with agency executives, managers, staff, and external stakeholders to help accomplish mission goals, manage change, and optimize resources through proven enterprise architecture methods.

Changes in Direction

Outcomes:• Revitalized community that is relevant and engaged.

• Strong leadership support for the participation of architects in key initiatives.

• A diversity of views within the community are heard and considered.

• New methods for architecture that are more agile, efficient and standard.

• Updated policy to reflect new priorities, methods, and desired outcomes.

• A career path and training standards for federal enterprise architects.

Changes in Governance

• OMB, Federal CIO: Sets federal policy- EA programs, practices, reporting.

• OMB, Chief Architect: Leads federal EA community, advises Federal CIO. Runs quarterly Chief Architect Forum Meetings.

• OMB, FEAPMO: Maintains federal EA approach and does projects.

• CIO Council: Promotes federal IT community discussions, advises Federal CIO, publishes best practices and reports, maintains reference archive.

• CIO Council, AIC: Promotes best practices, supports outreach.

• AIC Sub-Committees: Promotes the development of best practices and methods in specific EA areas, supports outreach, and projects.

• AIC Outreach Sub-Committee: Runs quarterly “Architecture Plus” meetings for government and industry participants to discuss EA issues.

Changes in Approach

Strategy

Business

Information & Data

Applications & Services

Technology Infrastructure

PRM

BRM

DRM

SRM

TRM

Integrating theFederal EAFramework

and ReferenceModels

Strategic Goals

Enabling Applications

BusinessServices

Host Infrastructure

Data and Information

Secu

rity

Co

ntr

ols

(SRM

) (PRM)

(BRM)

(DRM)

(TRM)Curr

ent V

iew

s Future Views

Enterprise Plan

Transition Plan

Governance

Standards

Framew

ork

Use

MissionSuccess

AuthoritativeReference

Reso

urce

Opti

miz

ation Functional

Integration

Common Approach to Federal EA

FEAF-II

Changes in Scope

Level Scope PlanningDetail

Impact Audience

Govt.-WideServices

SectorServices

Sin

gle

Ag

ency

Mu

ltip

le

Ag

enci

es

Government-Wide& International

Multi G2C, G2B, G2G

U.S. & OtherGovernments

Multiple Agencies,Businesses,

Interest Groups

National/GlobalOutcomes

SectorOutcomes

Medium

Medium

Agency-WideServices

Line of BusinessSpecific Services

ProgramSpecificServices

General Governm

ent

PolicyResourcesOversight

Transparency

Education & Workforce

Sector Defense & Security

Sector

Law & JusticeSector

Diplomacy & TradeSector

Economic & Financial

Sector

Transport & Space

Sector

Energy & Technology

Sector

Environment & Natural

ResourcesSector

Health & Well-Being

Sector

Sector designations are needed to support new services and interoperability across traditional agency boundaries.

Example: On-line Learning

Example: EnergyEfficient Housing

Example:Smart-Roads

Example: Alternative Fuels

Example: ElectronicPatient Records

Example: Border Protection

Example:International LegalCases

Example: International Trade & Exports

Example: Global Economic Tracking

Central sector for general government support services and transparency

Changes in Use – Shared Services

Secure Information Sharing

Achieving Secure Information Sharing

White House

Information Sharing Environment Governance

Interagency Policy Committee

Cross Federal Information Sharing

Co ChairsNSS / PM-ISEDNI

DHSDOJ DOD

DOS

• Intelligence• Law Enforcement• Defense• Homeland

Security• Foreign Affairs

Scop

e

I&A / POL

Information Sharing and Access IPC

Co ChairsWH / DHS

Information and Communications Infrastructure IPC Smart Grid

Cyber Security

Cyber Legislation

Architecture/ R&D

International

Privacy, Civil Rights,

Civil Liberties

Cyber Budget

Cyber OPSLegal

IRIS

IS&A Sub IPCs

DOD

DNI

DOSDOJ

DHS

National SAR InitiativeDOJ BJA

Fusion CentersDHS I&A

Watchlisting &ScreeningDHS POL

Information Integration

PMISE

Privacy, Civil Rights,

Civil Liberties

TREAS

TREAS

IC CIO

DoD CIO

TBD

TBD

RISS

LEISP

RISS NationalPolicy Group

IC ISE

Information Sharing Environment Governance

Sub-Committees

Working Groups

Information Sharing & AccessInteragency Policy Committee

Co-Chairs: Monte Hawkins, NSS & Kshemendra Paul, PM-ISE

Suspicious Activity Reporting

Chair: Jim Burch (DoJ/BJA)

Fusion CenterChair: Bart Johnson

(DHS)Vice Chair: Owen

Harris (FBI)

Information IntegrationChair: David Bray (PM-ISE)

Watchlisting & ScreeningChair: Monte Hawkins

(NSS)

Assured SBU Network Interoperability Working Group

Chair: Kevin Heald

Assured Secret Network Interoperability Working

GroupChair: James Beagles (DHS)

Paul Grant (DoD CIO); Chuck Kosak (USD(P)); Karen Riggs (JS)

• Chuck Kosak (USD(P)) • Mike Reheuser (DPCLO)

• Regina Piper (DoD CIO)

Data Aggregation Working Group

Chair: Donna Roy (DHS)Chair: Hank Bebe (DNI)

• Paul Grant (DoD CIO)• Carl Consumano (DoD CIO)

• Paul Grant (DoD CIO)• Carl Consumano (DoD CIO)

• Matt Taveres (HD&ASA)• Adam Gorowitz (USD(P))

• Stephanie Beavers (HD&ASA)

• Paul Grant (DoD CIO)• Walt Okon (DoD CIO)

Nominations Database Enhancements

Encounters Screening

AuditInformation Technology

ISE Privacy Guideline Revisions

Privacy, Civil Rights & Civil Liberties

Chair: Alex Joel (DNI)

HSPD-24 National Security Threat

HSPD-6 International Outreach

Standards Working Group

Chair: Walt Okon (DoD)

Federal Shared Services Strategy

Shared Service Working Group

Office of Management and BudgetOffice of E-Government & IT

34

Shared Services: Part of the IT Reform Agenda

Reform Item #6: Develop a Strategy for Shared Services

35

History of Shared Services

Quicksilver2001

Cloud-First2010

E-Government Act2002

Clinger-Cohen1996

E-Gov InitiativesInitial 25

2003

Lines of BusinessInitial 5 (HR, GM, FM, FHA,CM)

2004

Lines of BusinessRound 2 (Geo, BFE, ITI, ISS)

2006

Payroll Consolidation Completes

2009

GAO Report: Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication

2011

E-Gov InitiativesRound 2 (DAIP, ITDS, IAD-Loans/Grants)2008

Shared Service

s2011

36

What is a Shared Service?

Shared ServiceProducer ConsumersProvider

Roles: Provider, Producer, Consumer

Sources: Internal or external to the agency

(government or commercial).

37

Shared Service Concept

Public Clouds Federal Clouds

Collaboration

Content ManagementCloud eMail Others

Virtual Meeting SUPPORT

SERVICESECTOR

MISSION SERVICE SECTORS

Education & Workforce

Health & Well-Being

Defense & Security

Diplomacy & Trade

Economic & Financial

Environment & Natural Resources

Transport & Space

Energy & Technology

enablers

First focus on support sector services, as this has the greatest initial potential for lowering duplication & waste.

First focus on support sector services, as this has the greatest initial potential for lowering duplication & waste.

38

Shared Service Delivery Channel Continuum

Agency Level Shared Services

Departmental-Level

Shared Services

Agency LevelDecentralized

Departmental Decentralized

Existing Shared Services Centers

of Excellence

Expansion of COEs

Pure-Play Cloud PaaSIaaS

Private Sector Shared Provider –

Cloud/SW/Svcs

SaaS

Delivery Channels & Considerations

Delivery Considerations

• Is the service commercially available?• Are there security, privacy, classified requirements?• Does the agency need to be a provider?• How does a provider agency meet customer needs?

39

QuestionsWalt Okon

Senior Architect EngineerArchitecture & Infrastructure Directorate

Office of DoD CIOwalt.okon@osd.mil

703-607-0502

Secure Information Sharing