Session B: How do we manage heterogeneous networks including those at the tactical edge? Session Facilitator: Bruce Patterson Principal Network Systems Engineer MITRE 1 1 Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange

2 Breakout Session B: How do we manage heterogeneous networks including those at the tactical edge (*disadvantaged users)? What are the middleware requirements to make all of this come together? Is true multi-vendor interoperability attainable? If so to what degree? What is the impact in limited bandwidth and dynamic tactical networks? Do different rules need to apply there? Who controls and enforces service level agreements and monitors performance metrics? What are industry best practices for managing heterogeneous networks, that could also be adopted by the DoD? Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange

3 Breakout Session B: How do we manage heterogeneous networks including those at the tactical edge (*disadvantaged users)? What are the middleware requirements to make all of this come together? Inputs: Service Management vs Element Management vs. Resource Management Standards identification – SOA? QOS Management Profile – may be different on different networks Identification of critical/relevant info to the right end point based on available network capacity and type of user/type of equipment available (DIL User) Manager of manager vs. manger of elements – what does the NMS need to be? Common situational awareness capability incorporating a tactical and enterprise cross-domain solution Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange

4 Breakout Session B: How do we manage heterogeneous networks including those at the tactical edge (*disadvantaged users)? Is true multi-vendor interoperability attainable? If so to what degree? Inputs: Central authority guiding common standards and context in which those standards are intended to be used Ontology as the context Enforcement? Acquisition community involvement Tools come and go, so some level of multi-vendor interoperability will be necessary – already happing on some levels Provisioning and activation more difficult than gathering information How to include processes that will never be automated? Financial incentive to DoD specific application development? Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange

5 Breakout Session B: How do we manage heterogeneous networks including those at the tactical edge (*disadvantaged users)? What is the impact in limited bandwidth and dynamic tactical networks? Do different rules need to apply there? Inputs: Complete information on network is not always available Bandwidth Latency Intermittent connectivity Minimize the amount of information required to traverse the network depending on availability, bandwidth, etc. Self-healing capabilities How do you know the configuration when rejoining after being disconnected? How to tailor the views depending on the echelon/user requirements Network nodes are mobile Event based reconfiguration End-to-end visibility of assets Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange

6 Breakout Session B: How do we manage heterogeneous networks including those at the tactical edge (*disadvantaged users)? Who controls and enforces service level agreements and monitors performance metrics? Inputs: SLA contractual obligations don’t apply to military model in the same way – or at all SLAs will be different as network capabilities vary Is a military “SLA” really an expectation of service to meet mission requirements? End-to-end SLA may be different from a single service/interim service provider – coordination required at different levels to provision, operate and deactivate, ensure spectrum available Using performance metrics to monitor SLAs Can they be enforced in the DoD tactical environment? Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange

7 Breakout Session B: How do we manage heterogeneous networks including those at the tactical edge (*disadvantaged users)? What are industry best practices for managing heterogeneous networks, that could also be adopted by the DoD? Inputs: TM Forum ITIL OPNET type simulations SNMP, WMI, NetFlow, etc. Better configuration control Some companies merge, but maintain autonomy in NM operation. Different DoD entities may have valid reasons as well in separate, but interoperable systems Ontology development Participation in standards bodies Security standards Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange