NDIA / USMC War Game 2007 Command & Control Integration Cell 1 Outbrief

C2 Integration Issue 1 Issue: MAGTF C2 Commander-Centric capabilities require shared understanding of commander’s intent and guidance, coordination of executable tasks, collaborative planning, execution, assessment and decision-making support requirements. This inherently requires the integration of displays, processes, data feeds, net-centric services, and necessitates an open, service oriented architecture (SOA) development. This represents the decision-makers interface (command) with the supporting infrastructure (control). This capability must extend across all MAGTF C2 Capability Sets (CAPSETS I – V) from MEF Command to the individual Marine. Examine this issue in the context of Joint, Naval, Coalition, Inter-Agency C2 viewpoints and provide suggestions, solutions or recommendations. When examining this issue attempt to: Identify current and projected technologies supporting this capability Discuss SOA development to date including lessons learned Identify unique DOTMLPF needs associated with this capability development, e.g. tactics, techniques, procedure (TTP) modifications; significant bandwidth needs, compression capability, etc.

C2 Integration Issue 1 Examine this issue in the context of Joint, Naval, Coalition, Inter-Agency C2 viewpoints and provide suggestions, solutions or recommendations. Consider Joint, Naval, Coalition, Interagency C2 entities as a single community of interest and solve the C2 problem for all, rather than stovepiping. An information assurance environment needs to exist that supports security needs of all these entities. Success of this integration presupposes knowledge and active discussion of future intent/direction of all of these entities. The major challenges of Interoperability lies primarily outside of DoD, e.g., more with inter-agency and coalition entities. Streamline the certification processes that systems must go through: Performance Test (FDCE) Interoperability Testing (JTIC) Information Assurance certification (DISA, NSA) DoD should define, (clarify), and adopt a common data model. Cornerstone to interoperability

C2 Integration Issue 1 Identify current and projected technologies supporting this capability Accredited multi-level security Adoption of a Service Oriented Architecture reference model/standard. Transition to IPv6 with industry. Technologies that enable shared data environment, e.g., object request brokers, publish and subscribe architectures. Metadata-tagging/digitalization Software vs. hardware solutions. Mobile ad hoc networking technologies. Evaluate/leverage gamers HMI. Hardware and software technology to support high definition video/imagery, e.g., bandwidth management, data compression. Knowledge discovery/ data mining technologies and techniques

C2 Integration Issue 1 Discuss SOA development to date including lessons learned Evaluate/leverage global industry investments in service oriented architectures. Evaluate/leverage SOA in Army’s Future Combat System. Evaluate/leverage SOA in Air Force Joint Battlespace Infosphere. Monitor SOA in Navy’s Consolidated Afloat Network Enterprise Services as the program matures. Challenge/expense to migrate legacy services to the SOA model. Discrete capability modules

C2 Integration Issue 1 Identify unique DOTMLPF-P needs associated with this capability development, e.g. tactics, techniques, procedure (TTP) modifications; significant bandwidth needs, compression capability, etc. Design software to be intuitive with little need for training to learn how to use it. Take advantage of great software/computer literacy among young warfighters. Need to pay attention to horizontal integration of DOTMLPF-P with dedicated personnel. Currently there is an institutional gap between the Materials solution(SysComs) and the rest of the DOTMLPF-P.(JFCOM/MCCDC). Bandwidth for high definition video/imagery.

C2 Integration Issue 2 Issue: MAGTF C2 capabilities require “common, modular, scalable” solutions that are fully integrated with in an adaptive, distributed network of commanders, staffs, operating units, supporting organizations, sensors, weapons, and other C2 nodes interacting with one another over an underlying information infrastructure and service oriented architecture (SOA). This capability attribute envisions multi-functional roles for operational facilities (OPFACS), e.g. Direct Air Support Center (DASC) today, and Tactical Air Command Center (TACC) tomorrow, with only minimal adjustment... When examining this issue attempt to: Identify current and projected technologies supporting this capability Identify unique DOTMPLF needs associated with this capabilities development, e.g. occupational skills (MOS) requirements, etc. Discuss SOA as an enabler in supporting “common, modular, scalable” solutions. Examine this issue in the context of Joint, Naval, C2 viewpoints and provide suggestions, solutions or recommendations

C2 Integration Issue 2 Identify current and projected technologies supporting this capability Service oriented architectures with open systems framework. Common module approach for hardware. COTS approach for hardware and software recognizing configuration management issues, including a well-conceived technology insertion model. Common commercial software standards to which all software is written. Efficient techniques for generating new software that integrates with old, e.g., model-driven development. Use of commercial encryption. Wireless LANs. Server consolidation due to use of SOA technology

C2 Integration Issue 2 Identify unique DOTMLPF-P needs associated with this capabilities development, e.g. occupational skills (MOS) requirements, etc. Enlightened policy changes in many areas, e.g., information assurance accreditation, use of industry standards, would facilitate reduction in lifecycle cost and supportability. Use of COTS reduces training costs by leveraging commercially available training courses.

C2 Integration Issue 2 Discuss SOA as an enabler in supporting “common, modular, scalable” solutions. Software designed for use within the SOA framework may not be well supported at end of life unless a suitable business model supports incentives for industry. Participation by industry in the completely open systems model may be improved by changing the business model to better incentivize industry.

C2 Integration Issue 2 Examine this issue in the context of Joint, Naval, C2 viewpoints and provide suggestions, solutions or recommendations. The multi-functional roles, DASC, TACC, INTEL, and Fires/ Maneuver, are all on different schedules. There is a risk to developing an integrated MAGTF C2 unless implementation of these roles is better coordinated. Joint/Naval C2 tasks will add requirements to the mix. Who will pay for developing these capabilities? DoD should look at separate funding to “fill the gaps” between systems that must operate jointly. There seems to be a gap in network/communications coverage. USMC should consider developing a more robust airborne network coverage solution. (Can every airborne platform in theater be equipped to be a forwarding node in the network?) Consider utility of an airborne command post to facilitate distributed operations and improve agility.

C2 Integration ID strengths and gaps within C2 Integration in the context of Joint, Naval, and USMC Viewpoints Strengths Use of SOA seems to be a good fit to the requirement. Use of COTS components gives good performance at right price point. Adoption of DISA layered taxonomy will improve interoperability with other DoD systems. Leveraging (reusing) software developed by other services. Good use of Other People’s Money (OPM). Gaps Information Assurance needed for sharing information at different classification levels with partners having different clearance levels. “Glue” between Marine, Navy and Joint capabilities has no funding source Gap exists between Intelligence and Operations communities High degree of variability in what information can be shared with different coalition partners. Development schedule coordination problem between components supporting the multi-functional roles.

C2 Integration Provide recommendations for NDIA Study Groups C2 architecture assessment study to look at: Four layer model, as described in CONOPS Integration of fifth layer – Information Assurance End-to-end, evaluation of all five layers. MAGTF C2 common data model study Consistent with relevant MCEITS, Navy, DISA, Joint, Army, USAF data models Network communications analysis study Projection of future bandwidth/spectrum needs Evaluation of bandwidth management technologies Evaluation of spectrum optimization/reuse strategies Coordinate study efforts with NDIA C2 Committee.

C2 Integration ID Opportunities for increased Collaboration between Industry and USMC More events like this Funded Industry team studies Cost Sharing R&D Collaborative Developmental Lab Technology OpenHouse

The End