Live, Virtual, Constructive Architecture Roadmap: The ... · Live, Virtual, Constructive...
Transcript of Live, Virtual, Constructive Architecture Roadmap: The ... · Live, Virtual, Constructive...
1
Live, Virtual, Constructive Architecture Roadmap: The Quest for Interoperability, Standards, and
ReuseGary W Allen, PhDProject Manager
JTIEC&
Amy Henninger, PhDAssociate Director
M&SCO
NDIA - 12th Annual SE Conference
2
Presentation Agenda
• Introduction• Where are we?• How did we get here?• Where are we going?• How are we getting
there?• Why are we doing this?• Conclusion
3
Where are we?
•LVCAR Study Completed SEP 2008
•Provided:•Recommendations•Rationale•Business Models
•Phase II:•LVCAR Implementation•Two year effort•Take advantage quick starts•Involve the entire M&S community•Provide exit strategy
4
How did we get here?
Growing Demand ForLVC Interoperability
Technical & Joint Operations
Broad Proliferation of Tools, Standards, Gateways
Repositories, etc
Numerous, ParallelArchitectures
(HLA, DIS, CTIA, TENA)
5
How did we get here?• Live, Virtual, Constructive Architecture Roadmap (LVCAR) Study• Purpose: “Develop a future vision and supporting strategy for
achieving significant interoperability improvements in LVC simulation environments.”
• Focus: Three dimensions of simulation interoperability– Technical Architecture– Business Models– Standards Evolution and Management Process
• Precepts That Guide Implementation– Do no harm– Interoperability is not free– Start with small steps – Provide central management
• Result: A set of recommendations that guide HLT S-C-2
6
Maintain the Status Quo (“Do Nothing”) (Strategy 1)
Strategy #2 will constitute much of the
initial phase in executing option #3
Enhance Interoperability of
Mixed-Architecture Events
(Strategy 2)
All switch to a single, newly-
developed architecture
Select One of the Existing Architectures
(Strategy 4)
Develop A New Architecture (Strategy 5)
All switch to a designated architecture
Strategy #2 is a viable branch (exit path) from
Strategy #3, if warranted
(Ultimate goal is a single architecture - could also
be a smaller set of interoperable architecture
implementations)
CurrentStatus
Encourage and Facilitate Architecture Convergence
(Strategy 3)
Creation of a logical
architecture(architecture
of architectures)
Singlearchitecture
implementationemerges from
existing set
How did we get here?
7
Where are we going?
TASK ACTIVITY 1 Arch-Independent Object 2 Common Capabilities (Reuse) 3 Architecture Convergence 4 Bridges & Gateways 5 Management & Standards
Focus: Pursue recommendations identified in the Live, Virtual, Constructive Architecture Roadmap (LVCAR) report sponsored by the OSD Modeling & Simulation Steering Committee (M&SSC)
MSSC10 MY1 MYDecision Support Data1
Manageme
ntActivi
ties
MSSCRRI dependent
RRI dependentBalance the marketplace3
TATN/A1 MY RRI – Balance the marketplace1
MSSCTBDTBD Identify LVC Keystone1Business
Activities
MSSCN/A1 MYDevelop evolutionary growth path for LVC standards1
MSSCN/A1 MYRRI - Increase sphere of influence in SISO1
MSSC20 MY2 MYCoordinate activities and fund participation in commercial standards development groups2
MSSC10 MY,$2M
1 MY,$200K
Engage SISO and the broader LVC community1
MSSCN/A50K –150K
Make IEEE standards more accessible to LVC community.2Stand
ards Activi
ties
RET5.2 - 21.7 MY5.2 MYSpecify a resource or capability to facilitate
pre-integration systems readiness2
RET4.25 - 17 MY4.25 MYProduce common gateways and bridges1
RETRRI dependent
RRI dependentConvergence implementation3
RET.8 - 3.7 MY.8 MYConvergence plan3
TATN/A7 MYRRI – Convergence feasibility determination and design1
RET3.8 – 15.8 MY3.8 MYProduce and/or enable reusable development
tools2
MSSC and RET7.7 MY1.8 MY
Analyze, plan and implement improvements to the processes and infrastructure supporting M&S asset reuse
2
RET1.7 - 7.7 MY1.7 MYCreate common, reusable federation agreement template1
RET2.1 - 9.6 MY2.1 MYDescribe and document a common, architecture-independent systems engineering process
1
RET5 - 20 MY5 MYCommon components of architecture-independent object models1Archit
ecture Activities
Coordinated by
Bounds of 10-year
Investment
Initial Investment
Investments
MSSC10 MY1 MYDecision Support Data1
Manageme
ntActivi
ties
MSSCRRI dependent
RRI dependentBalance the marketplace3
TATN/A1 MY RRI – Balance the marketplace1
MSSCTBDTBD Identify LVC Keystone1Business
Activities
MSSCN/A1 MYDevelop evolutionary growth path for LVC standards1
MSSCN/A1 MYRRI - Increase sphere of influence in SISO1
MSSC20 MY2 MYCoordinate activities and fund participation in commercial standards development groups2
MSSC10 MY,$2M
1 MY,$200K
Engage SISO and the broader LVC community1
MSSCN/A50K –150K
Make IEEE standards more accessible to LVC community.2Stand
ards Activi
ties
RET5.2 - 21.7 MY5.2 MYSpecify a resource or capability to facilitate
pre-integration systems readiness2
RET4.25 - 17 MY4.25 MYProduce common gateways and bridges1
RETRRI dependent
RRI dependentConvergence implementation3
RET.8 - 3.7 MY.8 MYConvergence plan3
TATN/A7 MYRRI – Convergence feasibility determination and design1
RET3.8 – 15.8 MY3.8 MYProduce and/or enable reusable development
tools2
MSSC and RET7.7 MY1.8 MY
Analyze, plan and implement improvements to the processes and infrastructure supporting M&S asset reuse
2
RET1.7 - 7.7 MY1.7 MYCreate common, reusable federation agreement template1
RET2.1 - 9.6 MY2.1 MYDescribe and document a common, architecture-independent systems engineering process
1
RET5 - 20 MY5 MYCommon components of architecture-independent object models1Archit
ecture Activities
Coordinated by
Bounds of 10-year
Investment
Initial Investment
Investments
8
Where are we going?
• Approach– Reduce LVC architecture divergence and tool proliferation
– Identify organizational and structural (e.g. use of standards) options to better manage LVC architecture interoperability
– Create reference models to focus data and service reuse efforts
– Explore emerging technology issues related to future LVC architecture performance and requirements
9
Where are we going?
• Desired Results– Standardized bridges and gateways to link architectures
– Convergence of LVC architecture activities and reuse libraries
– Commonality in federation templates, object models, engineering processes
– Initiatives to pursue translational architectures
10
How are we getting there?
M&S
COMMUNITY
LVCAR
IMPLIMENTATION
(FY09 Phase 1)
M&S
SC
LVCARStudy
IdentifiesAreas
ofInvestment
(FY10 Phase 2)
IMPLIMENT
LVCAR
MANAGINGTHE LVC
ENVIRONMENT
CONVERGETHE LCV
ARCH
COMMONLVC
CAPABILITIES
COMMON LVCGATEWAYS &
BRIDGES
ARCH INDOBJECTMODEL
Net-Centric•SOA•Sim Interface
(FY11 Phase 3)
LVCARCORE
ARCHITECTURE
Tool BoxArch Ind Data FormatsLibrary/DepositoryDev ToolsLVC Capabilities
STD GatewaysSTD Bridges
M&S
COMMUNITY
LVCARExit
Strategy
(FY12 )
•BusinessModels
•Policies•Standards•Utilities
11
Why are we doing this?
12
Why are we doing this?
HLA
TENA
CTIA
DIS
VirtualInteroperability
13
Summary
• JTIEC and M&S CO have established a productive and collaborative working relationship
• Currently S-C-2 HLT has no major performance, schedule or cost issues
• S-C-2 Project Manager focus is to carry forward the recommendations from the defining LVC Architecture Roadmap study to the ultimate benefit of the readiness of our warfighters.
14
Discussion
Gary w Allen, PhDS-C-2 HLT Project Manager
Joint Training Integration and Evaluation Center (JTIEC)[email protected]
(O) 407-208-5607(C) 407-601-9838
LVC