Embedding Command and Control, Information Assurance, and … · 2017-05-18 · Embedding Command...
Transcript of Embedding Command and Control, Information Assurance, and … · 2017-05-18 · Embedding Command...
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Embedding Command and Control, Information Assurance, and Other Decision Points in Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Analyses
Steven H. Dam, Ph.D., ESEP President, SPEC Innovations 571-485-7805 [email protected] October 24, 2012
1
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Overview
What is the Problem with C2/IA Modeling?
LML Sequencing
Tool Needs
Summary
2
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH
C2/IA MODELING?
3
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
How Do People Usually Decompose Systems?
4
Enterprise Services
Warfighting System
Weapons
Sensors
Command and Control
Discovery
Collaboration
IA/Security
… …
What’s wrong with these pictures?
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
What’s Wrong with This? • By beginning with separating out
command and control, or information assurance at the top level, it becomes harder to build in these essential capabilities into the other components of the system
• The interfaces become complex, speed of execution is reduced, and “holes” in the system become common
5
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
How Can We Do It Better?
• Do not decompose C2 and IA/Security at the top level
• Let those aspects of control come out of the functional analysis
• Then identify and allocate those functions to the C2 participants and organizations
• But the current languages do not help the situation, because they do not capture all the decision points explicitly as functions
6
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Example: SYSML
Source: http://www.mel.nist.gov/msidlibrary/doc/sysmlactivity.pdf
How are decisions captured by these diagrams?
7
Decision Points
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
LIFECYCLE MODELING
LANGUAGE SEQUENCING
8
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
LML Sequencing
Action A Action B
Action A
Action B
Action C
Condition 1
Condition 2
Action A
Action B
LOOP
Action A
Action C
Range
Range (e.g.) 1 to n (iterate)
Until r < z (loop)
PARALLEL
SEQUENTIAL
SELECTION
SY
NC
OR
Action C (Exit Criteria) L
OO
P
9
No constructs – only special types of Actions – ones that enable the modeling of command and control/ information assurance to capture the critical decisions in your model
Coordinated by Asset C
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
OR
LML Action Diagram Captures Behavior
Which path?
Action in Parallel
Action
Start End
Trigger
SY
NC
Input/Output 2 Synchronize Information
1.2
1.3
1.7
Action
1.1 Optional Action 2 in Loop
1.6
External Input
External Output
Input/Output 3
LO
OP
Exit Criteria
1.5
Optional Action 1
1.4
10
Input/Output 1
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Example: Sync Execution Logic
11
Action Control Line
No trigger: Action enabled and will execute
Action Diagram Timeline
Action Duration = x sec
0 sec x sec
Action Control Line
With trigger: Action enabled, but will not execute until trigger received
Action Duration = x sec
y sec
Trigger Trigger takes y sec before received by Action
wait
0 sec y + x sec
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Execution Logic – Concurrency No Trigger; No Coordination Action
12
Action A
No trigger: Action A enabled and will execute; Asset A performs Action A
Action Diagram Timeline
Action A Duration = x sec
0 sec y + x sec
synch
Action B
coordinated by Asset A
Duration = y sec
y sec
Action B
Start to Start (SS) between A and B
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Execution Logic – Concurrency With Trigger; No Coordination Action
13
Action A
Trigger: Action A enabled, but must wait to execute; Asset A performs Action A
Action Diagram Timeline
Action A Duration = x sec
0 sec y + x sec
synch
Action B
coordinated by Asset A
Duration = y sec
y sec
Action B
Trigger
wait
Finish to Start (FS) between B and A
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Execution Logic – Concurrency No Trigger; With Coordination Action
14
Action A
No trigger: Action C enabled and will execute; Asset A performs Action A and Action C
Action Diagram Timeline
Action C
Duration = x sec
0 sec z + x sec
synch
Action B
coordinated by Asset A
Duration = y sec
y sec
Action B Action C
Action A
Duration = z sec z sec
z > y
Finish to Start (FS) between C and A
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Execution Logic – Concurrency No Trigger; With Coordination Action
15
Action A
No trigger: Action C enabled and will execute; Asset A performs Action A and Action C
Action Diagram Timeline
Action B
Duration = x sec
0 sec z + x sec
synch
Action B
coordinated by Asset A
Duration = y sec
y sec
Action C Action C
Action A
Duration = z sec z sec
y > z
Finish to Start (FS) between C and A
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Execution Logic – Concurrency With Trigger; With Coordination Action
16
Action A
No trigger: Action C enabled and will execute; Asset A performs Action A and Action C
Action Diagram Timeline
Action B
Duration = x sec
0 sec y + x sec
synch
Action B
coordinated by Asset A
Duration = y sec
y sec
Action C Action C
Action A
Duration = z sec z sec
y > z
Trigger
wait
Finish to Start (FS) between B and A
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Problem with not including synch
17
Request Information
Server
Provide Information
Inte
rfa
ce
Client
Physical View Functional View
Information Request
Information
Deadlock occurs; no IA or C2 functionality
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Problem with not including synch
18
Request Information
Provide Information
Functional View
Information Request
Information
Deadlock Relieved; IA functionality identified
Validate/ Authorize Request
Authorization
coordinated by IA Asset
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Innoslate®
• Innoslate 1.0 meets most of the LML Action diagram requirements
– Synch is currently missing, but expected soon
• Since LML is designed as an open standard, we hope other tool vendors consider adding the Action diagram to their tools as well
20
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
FireSAT Design Reference Mission
21
Decision Points
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Simulation
• Integrated simulator (both continuous and discrete event) are needed for ensuring executability of design and operational procedures
• Innoslate has a first cut discrete event simulator built-in, but more work is needed
• Linking to other simulation tools (e.f. Satellite Toolkit) may be feasible in the future
22
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Innoslate Simulation of FireSAT Design Reference Model
23
Cost and Resources can also be captured in this simulation; each decision point can also be prompted for a user response
© 2012 Systems and Proposal Engineering Company. All Rights Reserved
Summary
• The problem with modeling C2, IA, Security and other decision points
• LML helps force the capturing of decision points
25