Robert K. Ackerman
Bringing diverse information technology programs together under a single
umbrella goes beyond settling on common commercial technologies.
Virtually every piece of military electronics hardware, from the simplest handheld
personal computing assistant to the most powerful mainframe computer, faces the challenge
of interoperability to fit into the U.S. Defense Department's Global Information Grid.
Designed as the ultimate military networking project, the grid is a cornerstone for
achieving the information superiority outlined in the department's Joint Vision 2010 and
Joint Vision 2020.
The Global Information Grid, or GIG, is designed to link all diverse military
information system elements into a common network of networks to permit the smooth and
timely flow of information to whomever needs it. The effort, described by Defense
Department officials as "the entry fee to the future," also is envisioned to
link the revolution in business affairs and the revolution in military affairs.
The GIG's mantra is to provide the right information at the right time to the right
warfighter in the right format. This assumes bandwidth on demand and zero-bit false data
rate. And, it must meet exacting security needs that permit customers to use the GIG
effectively while denying adversaries any opportunities to wreak havoc in its target-rich
information environment.
John Osterholz, director of architecture interoperability in the Office of the Chief
Information Officer (CIO), Office of the Secretary of Defense, emphasizes that the GIG is
a transformation activity rather than a program. Part of the GIG's mission is to organize
large elements of information technology to enable their integration and assimilation.
Over time, a more detailed structure will be synchronized to ensure that end-to-end
capabilities operate in concert.
"Much of the GIG transformation recognizes that the forces will be leaner, lighter
and faster and will depend even more on reach-back to information and computing
capabilities that used to happen organic to the unit that was using them," Osterholz
warrants.
Arthur L. Money, assistant secretary of defense for command, control, communications
and intelligence and chief information officer, Office of the Secretary of Defense, notes
that information superiority has moved on to become decision superiority, which adds speed
of decision into information. Each of the services has been developing its own systems
aimed at networking the battlespace, but these systems largely have been stovepiped with
little assurance that they would work in concert with their equivalents in other services.
The GIG becomes necessary because the speed of information transfer does not permit the
luxury of spending time to make data compatible, he adds.
He continues that, while the department increasingly is turning to commercial
off-the-shelf equipment because its speed is better than almost anything the department
could develop, potential adversaries have access to the same commercial hardware and
software. The distinction between the United States and its adversaries can come down to
the speed with which the military can apply its information to decision making.
The GIG's connectivity will extend to any device that passes information, Money notes.
"Anything that sends or receives a one or a zero is to be compatible with this
grid," he says.
Adapting legacy equipment to work in this new information grid is the biggest challenge
facing the GIG, Money offers. "We must get the legacy equipment fixed, transformed,
replaced, or compliant with the GIG so that we're more interoperable," he declares.
And, there is no formula or quick fix to attain that solution.
"The heart of this information superiority is that there is no way we can throw
away 30, 40, even 50 years of legacy equipment," Money warns. Much of this gear was
built without any thought to interoperability as it currently is defined. So, the
department must find a way to incorporate this vital gear into the interoperable grid.
Money cites gateways and interfaces as the current options for achieving compatibility.
The department faces two other key challenges in implementing the GIG: determining
priority needs and achieving information assurance. Meeting the first challenge--sorting
out which elements, capabilities and technologies are important--entails recognizing that
the GIG cannot be all things to all people simultaneously, Osterholz relates. This
transformation must begin somewhere and must meet the department's priority needs.
The horse that leads the cart, Osterholz explains, is the clear understanding of the
operations that information technology must support. "Our major thrust is to make
sure that we have a full understanding of the operational view--some call it the
operational architecture--for the activities for which this information technology is to
be applied. Once you have that reasonably good view to a level necessary to understand the
basic operations, then you are in command of either a material solution or a procurement
such as an outsourced service."
Osterholz emphasizes the GIG's governance process as vital to its success. This process
involves the Joint Staff, the services and the department CIO. "Part of what we bring
to the picture is the challenge of bringing process and technology together,"
Osterholz states. A technology-only systems solution would be an unsatisfactory solution,
he emphasizes. So, priorities must be established to allow important elements to compete
for resources.
In establishing these priorities, the CIO office's approach is to focus on the
importance to joint operations. This is expressed through the architecture to make clear
what those joint missions are and how they are supported by information technology.
Additional factors include major shortfalls in that support and how best to cover those
shortfalls, either through investment or through nonmaterial solutions such as changes in
tactics, techniques and procedures--in other words, new business processes.
The second major challenge--information assurance--arises because both the warfighter
and the national policy maker must have confidence that the GIG is dependable. And, those
engaged in combat support activities must be able to rely on the GIG to carry out
e-commerce and other network-centric combat support operations at their required fast
pace.
With information assurance being key to maintaining GIG effectiveness, the CIO office
is seeking improvements beyond the defense-in-depth concept currently in operation,
Osterholz maintains. Attacks on U.S. defense information capabilities will be increasingly
sophisticated and numerous, and the GIG cannot be protected without the ability to
characterize and respond more quickly and more effectively to information attacks.
"We want to move from a defense in depth to a defense in breadth," he allows.
This involves looking across a broader front of potential attacks, including those of
cooperative insiders.
Virtually every device, even the smallest handheld one, could be an entry point for an
attack, Money points out. So, the security infrastructure will ensure that data from that
handheld device does not enter the GIG in an unprotected manner.
Money notes that almost every information technology has vulnerabilities, and the key
to successful GIG risk management is defense in layers. The department has endured 28,000
cyberattacks, and all except about a dozen were trivial nuisances that were handled
routinely. However, most of the dozen were serious, although the department was able to
handle them. Three years ago, Money relates, the department "would have been on its
knees" with the number of cyberattacks experienced in the past year.
The CIO office, in concert with the Joint Forces Command, has developed a set of
requirements for the GIG known as the capstone requirements document, or CRD. Osterholz
notes that this CRD, led by the Joint Forces Command, is now entering the Joint Staff
requirements process for formal coordination and approval. This will establish the
requirements basis for the GIG.
Co-evolving with the CRD is the GIG architecture. With its first version currently
undergoing rollout, this integrated architecture features an operational view that
discusses basic operational processes used by the department to execute its missions,
Osterholz says. A system view traces through from the operational view into actual systems
choices, while a technical view represents the standards base for acquiring GIG
components.
Osterholz relates that the GIG architecture is organized around the joint mission areas
recently approved by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. These include
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; logistics; and fire control, for example.
The department now is working to implement GIG below the policy level. This involves
examining programmatics in three areas. The first covers traditional capabilities
acquisition or services procurement. The architecture will be a controlling document for
establishing systems requirements in capabilities and for operational and systems
requirements in outsourced services.
The second area involves the designation of GIG pilot programs for large-scale
activities emphasizing integration. Osterholz explains that these large pilots will aim to
expose traditional problems that are not revealed in advanced technology demonstrations,
for example. One current department-level GIG pilot is the Navy/Marine Corps Intranet.
Facilities such as the Joint Interoperability Test Center in Fort Huachuca, Arizona, will
help assess some of these pilots.
The third area focuses on legacy management. Osterholz notes that this topic has not
been the beneficiary of the same kind of attention in a managerial sense, and he
characterizes this omission as a mistake. "This is the Vietnam of this
business," he allows in describing the difficulties inherent in legacy management.
However, failure to address it in the GIG effort could mean that a transition from legacy
systems to new technologies and capabilities "is pretty much not going to be
practical or possible," he states. Some legacy capabilities must be extended, which
must be determined in an upfront corporate-level decision.
Money emphasizes the need for commercial technologies in GIG operations. The pace of
technology change has shortened generations from 18 months to about 12 months, and the
Defense Department cannot continue its methodology of spending anywhere from two years to
eight years just on planning a new system. "We have a huge mismatch between the time
we can buy something and the current rate of obsolescence," he says.
The Joint Forces Command has taken on the responsibility as the joint doctrine
developer to pick up the operational view of the GIG and work these areas into the
command's ongoing doctrinal areas. The earliest emerging area will be network operations,
which is fundamental to the GIG, Osterholz points out. This element combines traditionally
separate network management, information assurance and information dissemination
management functions. Integrating these facets helps avoid seams in the management
capability that otherwise could be exploited by an adversary, and it helps facilitate
response to an information attack.
Quality of service in network operations is a key issue, Osterholz notes.
Traditionally, networks have been provisioned by bandwidth. Now, however, the department
has a greater understanding of the role that service quality plays in the distributed
computing environment. It affects virtually every functional area. This is especially
relevant in network management and basic engineering, where latency and other parameters
such as packet loss become key network performance criteria that are more important than
bandwidth, he emphasizes.
What Osterholz describes as "a sensible level of our computing capabilities"
also is important. The department successfully has consolidated most of its computing
operations at the mainframe level. Similar efforts at the server-based level have not been
as successful, he allows. The department still has "a large number of unfulfilled
requirements for systems administrators" because of the large number of server-based
computing capabilities that are not properly staffed. These systems administrators are
vital to information assurance as "the first line of defense," he notes. Some
consolidation of the department's server-based computing similar to that achieved with the
mainframes "is probably in the cards," he states, adding that this probably will
entail consolidating much of the mid-tier defensewide and joint applications in similar
enterprise computing centers.
The GIG architecture also will address the end state of convergence. The department
still is evaluating whether to converge on Internet protocol (IP) or to utilize existing
asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) as its convergence platform. The commercial world appears
to be converging on an IP-based platform, Osterholz admits, but intermittent connectivity
in the tactical community may make IP a less desirable choice. Some aspects of the
operations environment may mitigate against straight use of IP. The GIG decision will be
made on the basis of operational needs and not just because the commercial world takes a
particular path, he declares.
Nonetheless, at the communications network level, IP technologies are critical,
Osterholz offers. In the computing environment, the object request broker technology Corba
is vital for moving objects around a network. Any object-oriented languages are
strategically important.
GIG planners are strongly behind identity-based certification for access to networks
and computing. Public key infrastructure (PKI) likely will be used, not only for identity
certification to access facilities and networks, but also for managing data that
previously would be considered too sensitive to store on a network. This data now can be
protected on a community-of-interest basis using PKI certifications.
The reliability of commercial off-the-shelf software is important to the GIG, and
Osterholz states that the route to attaining that reliability has been a checkered path.
Commercial software reliability must improve if it is to be used in the GIG, even with the
price and market advantages inherent in commercial products. Money has emphasized working
with software manufacturers to tailor their product for military needs before mass market
penetration, and this effort is focusing on software for next-generation wireless
communication systems. Interoperability, especially across the oceans, is a major
challenge. Applications that enable interoperability before these wireless systems are
even introduced will enhance communications during combined operations among allied
nations.
Next-generation wireless technologies are key to GIG operations. Osterholz explains
that this discipline encompasses three of the GIG's five major transformations. One of
these transformations involves moving from data to relationships, which in turn requires
moving the data's object representation along with the data. The second transformation is
to transition from personal computers to interpersonal computers. This recognizes handheld
computing as a major capability in the grid. The third item is the migration from wired to
wireless datalinks. The combination of these three elements provides the customer
base--the warfighter, the business process user--with the freedom to execute their
operations anywhere and any time.
The CRD and the first version of the GIG architecture currently are being finalized.
Both are designed to be fundamental to the upcoming quadrennial defense review being
conducted by the Bush administration. Osterholz expects this strategic re-examination to
influence GIG resources in the fiscal year 2003-2008 time frame, which also will represent
the period of major thrusts in investment and process changes. Substantial pieces of the
GIG should be implemented by 2010.
Information exchange requirements in version 1.0 of the GIG architecture can be divided
among several different elements. The largest, which takes up about one-third of the
requirements, involves employing fires. The second largest, at about one-fifth, is command
and control (C2). The third largest, slightly smaller than C2, involves operations other
than war. Next, in descending order of size, are force protection; intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance; communications and computing; and logistics.
Several early decision opportunities loom for the 2003-2008 time frame. These include
network operations implementation; the joint tactical radio system; intelligence community
collaboration architecture options; and the family of interoperable operational pictures
(FIOP) information management.
Osterholz allows that attaining GIG goals likely will require some major investments.
However, it is premature to specify which individual devices will be key. Some areas, such
as network operations and assurance of service quality, are likely to require considerable
investment.
|