Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange

Report
Technical Exchange on Network
Management Interoperability
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 @ APL in Laurel MD
Final Pre-Conference Update 10/28/2013
1
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
What Is it?
AFCEA and Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) have
teamed up in support of the DoD CIO team to conduct a 1 day highly
interactive technical exchange on Network Management
Interoperability.
This single day of sessions will feature outstanding speakers and
session leads from government, academia, and private industry.
A limited number (250) of expert technically capable attendees will
actively participate focused on identifying and proposing solutions to
key problems at hand.
There will be tabletop exhibits in the “Solutions Area” where
attendees can explore technology solutions during breaks and over
lunch. More than 20+ exhibitors expected to participate.
2
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
• Key Objectives/Stakeholders
– Participation from DoD, IC and Civ Agencies - NM stakeholders
– Participation from Industry Partners – NM vendors, Carriers, Comms
Providers
– Participation from Academic Community – Professors, Researchers
– Share NM Interoperability challenges in today’s joint tactical network
operations
– Share NMWG Vision, Background, Accomplishments and Future Directions
• Discuss inter-relationships between NMWG and DoD’s Joint
Information Environment (JIE) Initiative
• Desired Outcomes
–
–
–
–
Opportunity to interact with experts on the topic areas and exchange ideas
Compiled Notes from all sessions generated for consumption
Short-term Action Items resulting from the discussion/dialogue tracked
A framework for a possible follow-up Plug-fest is established
3
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
• Keynote/Plenary Session
• Mr. Fred Wettling, Bechtel Fellow
• CAPT Gardner Rhea, DoD CIO Office
• Breakout Sessions/Tracks
Session 1 - Standards Based Interoperability
• Ms. Andrea Westerinen
• Mr. Nick Hoffer, MITRE
Session 2 - Service Level Management
• Mr. Kevin Sergent, Verizon
• Mr. Randy Mathis, USAF
Session 3 - Emerging Technologies
• Dr. Stephen Bush, GE Research
• Mr. Morris Hornik, DoD CIO
Session 4 - Continuous Operations
• BG (Ret) Stephen Spano, Amazon
• Mr. Paul Terzulli, USA
4
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Register Online on the AFCEA Website:
http://www.afcea.org/events/nettech/
5
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Schedule
0730 – 0830
0830 – 0900
0900 – 1000
1000 – 1030
1030 – 1200
1200 – 1300
1300 – 1430
1430 – 1500
1500 – 1700
1700
Registration, Continental Breakfast
Welcome and Introductions
Keynote and Baselining
Break in Solutions Area
Concurrent Break-out Sessions
Lunch in Solutions Area
Concurrent Break-out Sessions Cnt’d
Break in Solutions Area
Session Out briefs and Next Steps
Technical Exchange Ends
6
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 1: Standards Based Interoperability
Ms. Andrea Westerinen
Mr. Nick Hoffer, MITRE
7
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 1: Standards Based Interoperability
•
Standards Definition and Application
– There are many Network Management Standards and frameworks that appear to
be complimentary, overlapping or competitive. Which NM standards and
frameworks find greatest use among industry practitioners, and why does a
particular standard/framework is found to be more appealing or effective?
– Looking ahead to the ongoing consolidation of Network and IT infrastructures and
management, are existing standards adequate? What best-practices,
approaches lend themselves to newer standards that may be effective for both
Industry and Defense?
– How does industry keep current and relevant with new or evolving standards?
How are the standards enforced in the industry?
•
Interoperability
– How do multinationals or organization spread across multiple locations ensure
visibility/interoperability among network management of their diverse networks?
Achieve Situational Awareness? Are there interoperability profiles, interface
standards that have helped in dealing with this challenge?
8
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 1: Standards Based Interoperability (Continued)
•
Evolution of Data Models to Semantic Web/Ontology Models
– There are many data models which are either too broad or too specific and often
inadequate to address needs to a specific NM environment. Which of the
standard data models have found use in the Industry?
– What is Industry approach to aligning networking and network management
information using Semantic technology to exploit semantic richness for effective
management and operations?
•
Industry Guidance to DoD
– DoD CIO NMWG has adopted an approach for defining interoperability standards
for trouble-ticket exchanges. Would the industry be willing to review and provide
feedback on the DoD approach?
•
An Industry/DoD NM Interoperability Framework and Plug-Fest
– What would be a good umbrella (DMTF? NIST?, other) for Industry and DoD to
come together and settle on a common NM interoperability framework?
– An agreed upon Framework along with requisite Scenarios/Use-Cases will pave
way for a NM interoperability plug-fest
9
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 2: Service Level Management
Mr. Kevin Sergent, Verizon
Mr. Randy Mathis, USAF
10
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 2: Service Level Management
End-End Service performance is important to the industry (optimizing service delivery
cost, customer retention, and competitive advantage). It is also important to Defense
Community (mission effectiveness, prioritization and optimization of limited critical
resources to adapt to changing mission needs). In this technical exchange one area we
want to focus on management of service performance levels for users at the network
edge. For the commercial industry, this would mean mobile users, and for the DoD, that
would mean ‘tactical’ edge. Something close to battlefield conditions for the commercial
industry might be the state of infrastructure versus urgent needs that have to be met
during natural and other disasters (Hurricane Sandy, Hurricane Katrina).
•
SLM Framework
– Which standards, best-practices, tools, technologies and methods have helped
the Industry establish an effective SLM framework? What are industry
recommendations to DoD for developing a Service Level Framework?
•
Applicability to DoD Tactical Mission Environment
– Traditional Service Level Agreements (SLAs) appear to be inappropriate for
DoD’s tactical mission environment. How should “SLAs” be implemented in the
Tactical Domain?
11
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 2: Service Level Management (Continued)
– Are there related concepts that Industry can recommend to DoD?
– Is the Industry willing to share lessons-learned - what works and what doesn’t
work - with regards to End-End SLM?
•
Metrics
– Are there a set of metrics that have been useful with SLM? Are there a common
(handful) set of metrics that are found to be sufficient? Are there effective
Metrics by audience (end-customer, partner, supply/chain provider, internal
user)?
– Which metrics – definitions, instrumentation, collection, measurements – would
the industry recommend to DoD for SLM?
•
Review of DoD Approach
– Would the industry help refine and guide DoD Service Level Framework?
12
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 3: Emerging Technologies
Dr. Stephen Bush, GE Research
Mr. Morris Hornik, DoD CIO
13
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 3: Emerging Technologies
Change is a constant when it comes to technology and innovation in the
communications industry. Many technologies offer promise but fade away, while others
fundamentally change the way business is done. In the area of network management
and operations, one technology that has caught everyone’s fancy is ‘Software Defined
Networking’. Another technology that continues to hold promise is [Digital] Policy Based
Management.
•
Which technologies, methods, innovative approaches offer promise for
revolutionizing NM?
•
Where is industry driving its R&D investments to enhance or adopt newer
technologies?
14
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 3: Emerging Technologies (Continued)
•
What technologies, innovative approaches should DoD consider?
•
How does government identify new cutting edge tech in this space?
•
Where should DoD immediately direct its limited R&D funds?
•
Can we predict what will go wrong when we go from the lab to the field?
•
How do we integrate non-network enabled systems management?
•
Overhead issues around network management – compression - speed?
15
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 4: Continuous Operations
BG (Ret) Stephen Spano, Amazon
Mr. Paul Terzulli, USA
16
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 4: Continuous Operations
The integration of network and IT infrastructure, the pace of technology evolution, and the
resulting capabilities of rapid and self service provisioning has shortened the network
management cycles of planning, engineering, installation, deployment, operations and
disestablishment. In addition, network operations not only face routine disruptions, environmental
disruptions, but now are subject to concerted cyber disruptions. Resiliency, Rich Interoperability,
Automation are becoming more essential.
•
•
Integration of Planning and Operations
– While long-term planning still has an important role to play in NM and operations,
continuous planning is becoming important to ensure that available resources are
directed to where the immediate needs are. How is industry accomplishing this
today? What are lessons learned? Best Practices?
– Synchronizing and Verifying configurations are essential in ensuring end-end
delivery and performance of services. How does the Industry work across partners,
supply-chain providers, etc., to ensure end-end alignment of configurations?
Automated Management and Operations
– What approaches are currently in use in the industry to automate network management
and operations? What standards, technologies, tools, methods have been found to be
effective? What are the lessons learned in accomplishing some degree of automation?
17
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Break-Out Sessions
Session 4: Continuous Operations (Continued)
•
Mobile Network Management
– The wireless mobility industry has successfully created an eco-system where
infrastructure changes and rich mobile device capabilities coexist to deliver
unprecedented services and applications to today’s consumers. How does the industry
manage the dramatic evolution of infrastructure, offering of new services and plethora of
richly capable consumer devices?
– DoD employs specialized RF waveforms to meet bandwidth and communications
requirements in contested battle environments. One challenge is managing tactical
radios that adopt one or more of the approved waveforms. The solutions today typically
require a network manager for each type of radio used. These pose a challenge in terms
of training the soldiers and tactical operators in configuration and use of different devices,
and managing waveforms. What would be industry guidance to DoD on tactical mobility
network management?
•
Continuous Operations Under Threat - Resiliency
– Cyber threats and attacks are now an accepted norm for network management and
operations. It is important to achieve a useful degree of continued operations under
degraded conditions. Cyber threats have the potential to be far more disruptive and
sinister than those faced on a routine basis or natural disasters. What approaches and
methods has the industry adopted to ensure continuity of operations and availability of
critical services? Lessons Learned?
18
Network Management Interoperability Technical Exchange
Questions or Inputs?
Send feedback and suggestions to:
[email protected]
OR
[email protected]
19

similar documents