MIP Standard Briefing 8 December Dec 2006

MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 8 Dec 2006 www.mip-site.org
For further information on the Multilateral Interoperability Programme and its related activities you can contact to the MIP Chair: Mr. Ole Stensli MIP PMG Chair Phone nr: (+47) Mr. Rafael Falagan de la Fuente MIP PMG Vice chair Phone nr: This Multilateral Interoperability Programme (MIP) Standard Briefing been reviewed and is hereby “Approved” by the Heads of Delegation of participating members. The information contained herein remains the property of the MIP Participants; as such, its release to nations or agencies, who are not themselves participants in the Multilateral Interoperability Programme, including the media and general public is agreed however, unauthorised amendment of the information is not permitted. Use of MIP information, from this or any other MIP document, is entirely at the Users risk. Furthermore, if information contained within this document is used, appropriate acknowledgement to the MIP should be made. Date: 8 Dec 06 Unclassified MIP Unclassified Page 1

MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006
Outline MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Introduction Aim MIP Defined The MIP Concept MIP Baseline Phases & fielding plan Organisation Integrated Operational Test & Evaluation MIP Specification Implementation, Adoption & Stability Summary of Programme. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 2

Introduction (1) MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Looking for a “Common Understanding” of the Battlespace. “Interoperability of information” is essential. Information across national and language boundaries. From tactical to operational and strategic levels. Interaction with NGO. Common data model, common XML Schema, OWL Ontology, messaging… all look for a common understanding of the battlespace regardless different doctrines, procedures and tactics of the coalition members. Commanders require timely and accurate information. To achieve this, an assured capability for interoperability of information is essential. The successful execution of fast moving operations needs an accelerated decision-action cycle, increased tempo of operations, and the ability to conduct operations within combined joint formations. Also, supporting command and control (C2) systems need to pass information within and across national and language boundaries. Moreover, tactical C2 information must be provided to the operational and strategic levels of command including other governmental departments. Additionally, forces must interact with non-governmental organisations, including international aid organisations. The need is to share information that is created, stored and transmitted by different C2ISs that can be different to each other. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 3

Introduction (2) MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 The “Shared Awareness” implies “Shared Information”. A common language. AIM: Deliver an assured capability for interoperability of information Combined joint operations C2IEDM & JC3IEDM (STANAG 5525). Covers War, CRO and DAT. The shared awareness at the cognitive domain implies shared information at the information domain and therefore a straightforward mean to achieve relevance, timeliness and assurance. A common language will alleviate the need to have ad-hoc solutions for every partner that conducts to as many as 45 solutions for 10 partners. The Rosetta Stone is what will allow to translate the national semantics of the battlespace information into a common language that can therefore be translated into the myriad of dialects of the Babel tower that the C2ISs in a coalition are. The Multilateral Interoperability Programme (MIP) aims to deliver an assured capability for interoperability of information to support combined joint operations. Key to this, and the Jewel of the Crown is the C2IEDM, the common semantics of the battlespace. C2IEDM is evolving to address new more “joint” focus requirements to become the JC3IEDM (joint) during Baseline 3. MIP aim covers a wide variety of missions and scenarios from War to CRO or DAT. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 4

Aim MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 “The aim of the Multilateral Interoperability Programme (MIP) is to achieve international interoperability of Command and Control Information Systems (C2IS) at all levels from corps to battalion, or lowest appropriate level, in order to support multinational (including NATO), combined and joint operations and the advancement of digitization in the international arena.” “The aim of the Multilateral Interoperability Programme (MIP) is to achieve international interoperability of Command and Control Information Systems (C2IS) at all levels from corps to battalion, or lowest appropriate level, in order to support multinational (including NATO), combined and joint operations and the advancement of digitization in the international arena.” Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 5

MIP Defined (1) MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 What it is and what it provides: Materiel / Combat developer forum. Mature Process. Consensus-based Technical Specs. Venue for international interoperability testing Coordinates synchronization of materiel fielding plans System-independent capability based on information interoperability What MIP is and provides may be summarized as follows: Materiel / Combat developer forum Driven by national doctrine and requirements to build consensus on how to achieve operational interoperability through information exchange Mature process, long-term roadmap Consensus-based technical specification for national implementation Venue for international interoperability testing Coordinates synchronization of materiel fielding plans System-independent capability based on information interoperability Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 6

MIP Defined (2) MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 What it is not: A typical cooperative development program: No common funding No single Program Manager No common hardware or software development Organization specific, e.g., NATO, PFP, ABCA . . . If it is important to define clearly what is MIP, is also important to say what MIP is not: A cooperative development program: No common funding No single Program Manager No common hardware or software development Organization specific, e.g., NATO, PFP, ABCA . . . Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 7

Concept End-State MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Effective C2 for international operations Shared Tactical Picture Commander (Nation A) Staff Officers (Nation A) Staff Officers (Nation B) Commander (Nation B) Automatic Exchange Mechanism Common Data Model National Implementation (Nation A) National Implementation (Nation B) COLLABORATION COMMON UNDERSTANDING The concept for the overall end state is such that when the combined joint force can operate as a single, synchronized team in accomplishing its assigned mission in the modern battle space MIP has achieved its target. For that a common understanding between commanders within a combined joint force conducting military operations is required. The MIP contribution to this end state is to facilitate the timely flow of accurate and relevant information through a set of Information Exchange Mechanisms (IEM), specified within MIP, between the different national C2IS. MIP will therefore be one of the factors contributing to the realization of Network Enabled Capabilities for the commanders within a combined joint force. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 8

Concept MIP Solution MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 INTERNATIONAL MIP SOLUTION (Lingua Franca) NATIONAL A NATIONAL B NATIONAL C2IS (A) ODB NATIONAL C2IS (B) ODB MCI C2IEDM C2IEDM MAPPING MAPPING What is “The MIP Solution”? The means to achieve the MIP’s aim. Those means are “materialized” into a set of items delivered by the programme at the end of each Baseline. What does “The MIP solution” include or comprise? It includes three main parts: The MIP specifications Standard Operation Procedures Other documentation that is required for implementation of the specifications and for use of the MIP Common Interface (MCI). What is “The MCI (MIP Common Interface)”? The MCI is a logical description of the configuration of two or more implementations (in Soft and/or Hardware) of the MIP specifications that enables information exchange between two or more C2IS of different nations. What is the core of the MIP Solution? The core of the MIP solution is the C2 Information Exchange Data Model, C2IEDM for Baseline 2 and JC3IEDM for Baseline 3. It is a product of the analysis of a wide spectrum of allied information exchange requirements. It models the information that combined joint component commanders need to exchange. What does the MIP Solution do for The C2ISs and their final Users? The MIP solution enables C2IS to C2IS information exchange and allows users to decide what information is exchanged, to whom it flows, and when. Specifications SOPs Documents (MIP) Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 9

Concept Foundations MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 NATIONAL A INTERNATIONAL MCI NATIONAL B C2IEDM C2IS (A) ODB C2IS (B) C2IS (D) C2IS (C) NATIONAL C NATIONAL D MIP SOLUTION (Lingua Franca) UNIQUE COMMON PICTURE The MIP solution enables information exchange between co-operating but distinct national C2 systems. It is not within the scope of the programme to specify the end system (C2IS) functional capabilities however the MIP solution has proven to be a valuable source for national C2IS development. Key to this is the fact that National systems need not necessarily conform to any hardware or software standard. Typically systems will be acquired through national or NATO acquisition programmes and their architecture will conform to the national or NATO policy prevailing at the time. COMMON UNDERSTANDING Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 10

Concept MCI (co-located)
MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 National C2IS (Nation A) National C2IS (Nation B) Router Switch MEM DEM Router Switch MEM DEM This reflects the co-located solution as the switches are connected directly. It is also possible to connect both gateways to a WAN by putting the routers in between. This concept matches with the NATO Information Exchange Gateway (IEG) model for interconnection of different security domains. In this slide it is shown how the data exchange mechanism would operate. It could just have easily used the message exchange mechanism as an example. The MIP will include new information exchange mechanisms besides the MEM and DEM as the MIP solution evolves. Implementation (A) Implementation (B) Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 11

Concept Security MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 COMMS (Nation A) (Nation B) SECURE AREA MCI (A) Imple. (C) C2IS (A) C2IS (C) (Nation C) C2IS (B) Z ‘Red’ Area ‘Black’ Runs (B) Security is an important issue to which MIP pays especial attention. There is a document devoted to this within the MIP Specs. Its name is MSISP (MIP System Interconnection Security Policy). The MSISP establishes the members’ commitments to security In principle for the collocated solution, the MIP Common Interface is in the protected area (greentriangle), and the communications between different MIP gateways (MGw) occurs on the MIP LAN unencrypted. Nations are to ensure the security between their MGws and the national C2IS. In the no-collocated solution, the MCI is established by plugging the different MGws to a secured WAN. . Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 12

Concept Data Replication
MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 MIP Common Interface National C2IS National C2IS Nat. Comms. Nat. Comms. Ethernet LAN Nat. DB Nat. DB C2IEDM C2IEDM For the requirements of information exchange by pushing data, MIP has continued the development of the data exchange mechanism (DEM). II II PDU User Terminal {101}A05{ |7|R05{ …. User Terminal En. Armored Bat in 30TXM200123 Unclassified MIP © En. Armored Bat in 30TXM200123 MIP Unclassified Page 13

MIP Baseline Phases (1) MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Inception Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Elaboration Construction Baseline Release Integration FOC Transition In service period MIP has adopted the RUP (Rational Unified Process) as his development methodology for the Baseline 2 and future Baselines. The MIP IF (Integrated Framework) is the document which defines the MIP engineering environment. According to that methodology MIP has defined the following phases of the MIP Solution for a particular Baseline: Inception. Elaboration. Construction. Integration. Operational Test. Transition. During this period the Baseline Specifications and Documents are released. The baseline delivered in each cycle or Baseline will be in-service for the following two years in order to encourage nations to align their acquisition cycles with the agreed implementation schedule to gain maximum benefit. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 14

MIP Baseline Phases (2) MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Baseline 2 Inception Elaboration Construction Integration FOC Transition In service period Baseline Release 11 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 Today Baseline 3 Inception Elaboration Construction Integration FOC Transition In service period Baseline Release Baseline 4 Inception Elaboration Construction Integration FOC Transition In service p. B4 Release The Programme has gone through all the stages of Operational analysis, Concept, Feasibility, Definition, Development and demonstration along its history. MIP is tightly focused on delivering capability in an incremental manner based upon a rolling 2-year delivery cycle. In parallel the previous baselines are sustained, new operational requirements are analysed, new capabilities are agreed, and emerging technologies are explored. The MIP is an operational requirement driven programme with schedule constraint. The overall MIP Calendar is divided into 'Baselines' or evolutionary solutions, each Baseline will take three years of developing and will remain 'in-service' for two years. The first MIP solution was available at the end of 2003, after the Integrated Operational Test & Evaluation. This will be the interoperability solution available for Allies in 2004, 2005 and the first semester of Meanwhile, the second iteration of the MIP solution will be developed and become 'in-service' in mid/end 2006, 2007 and 2008, and so on. Nations are to be encouraged to align their acquisition cycles to benefit from this schedule. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 15

Concept Op. Requirements
MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Hierarchy and Prioritisation. MIP is evolving its solution to incorporate a new set of requirements that will improve the ability to exchange information amongst allies. This will include collaboration, messaging, automatic sharing of the situational awareness and common operational picture, in a combined and joint environment. The foundation stone is the MIP Tactical C2 interoperability Requirements, that contains all the operational requirements. Each requirement is assigned to a certain MIP Baseline for implementation, hence providing a road map for future developments that allows for incremental increases in capability as each Baseline is fielded. The MIP Tactical C2 Interoperability Requirements (MTIR v.2.3) determines what requirements are applied to MIP baseline 2. But it is important to stress the scope of the programme, whilst currently land focused it is anticipated that in the next iteration MIP covers the full spectrum of interoperability requirements: Information, both structured (friendly, Enemy, Environmental and plans and orders) and unstructured (NBC events, text, video, audio, graphics...) Information exchange, by pulling, pushing (data replication and messaging) and collaboration. Information management (ownership, precedence, dissemination and aggregation) Uninterrupted Support C2 (reliability, security, mobility). Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 16

Concept C2IEDM MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 GH – LC2IEDM – C2IEDM – JC3IEDM Automated C2 Interface Exchange Mechanism To Support Liaison and Automation Exchange Of Orders/Graphics Holdings/Status Information e.g., AD Weapons Control & Running Status Operational exchange standards use a common vocabulary consisting of 176 information categories that include over 1500 content elements. Information Exchange Data Model Serves as a Hub for functional areas CRO & Joint IERs Common specification and structuring of information to be exchanged is required in order to achieve automated information exchange. Structure of the information is expressed in a data model, built and documented in accordance with an accepted methodology. This model defines the standard elements of information (data) that form the basis for interoperability between those automated national Command and Control Information Systems (C2ISs) that accommodate the model's information structure. The data model was initially known as the Generic Hub (GH) Data Model. The name was changed to Land C2 Information Exchange Data Model (LC2IEDM) in The baseline 2 version contains considerably more joint content; as a result, the name was changed to C2 Information Exchange Date Model (C2IEDM). The latest version of the Data Model is called JC3IEDM (J stands for joint and the third C for consultation) and include many joint IER as its name indicates. JC3IEDM is already a NATO STANAG 5525 currently under ratification process. The scope of requirements agreed by MIP nations is to define only the information that is to be exchanged, rather than model all of the information that would normally be required by a national system. Consequently, JC3IEDM is first and foremost an information exchange data model. C2 data model serves as a “hub” for unifying information concepts that are embodied in the data specifications of functional areas: conventional fire support, barrier engineering operations, communications and electronics, and personnel administration. Other requirements are about Crisis Response Operations, Joint IERs, etc. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 17

Concept Baseline 1 MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Translation and formatting mechanism Translation and formatting mechanism C2IEDM C2IEDM MIP Agreed Standard for MEM MESSAGE EXCHANGE MECHANISM MIP MTF NATIONAL C2IS (A) ODB NATIONAL C2IS (A) ODB NATO DEGREE 2.H INTEROPERABILITY NATO LEVEL 4 INTERCONNECTIVITY C2IEDM C2IEDM MIP Agreed Standard for DEM DATA EXCHANGE MECHANISM Translation and formatting mechanism Translation and formatting mechanism The MIP Baseline 1 comprises: The Message Exchange Mechanism (MEM) consists of a suite of formatted messages that conform to AdatP-3 Part 1, plus guidelines for their use. The Data Exchange Mechanism (DEM) is an automatic data push mechanism that co-exists with the MEM. When a C2 application changes the state of information that it holds, and which is recognised by the DEM, this information is automatically replicated to all other co-operating systems that have agreed to exchange this information. With both exchange mechanisms the meaning and context of the information is preserved and requires no additional processing on receipt to make it useful. The MIP specifications enable interoperability at Degree 4.a (DEM) and 2.h (MEM) and functions at NATO Level 5 of System Interconnection. NATO DEGREE 4.A INTEROPERABILITY NATO LEVEL 5 INTERCONNECTIVITY Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 18

Concept Baseline 2 MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 MMHS MMHS MTA MTA MIP Agreed Standard for MEM MESSAGE EXCHANGE MECHANISM eSMTP NATIONAL C2IS (A) ODB NATIONAL C2IS (A) ODB NATO DEGREE 2.H INTEROPERABILITY NATO LEVEL 4 INTERCONNECTIVITY C2IEDM C2IEDM MIP Agreed Standard for DEM DATA EXCHANGE MECHANISM Translation and formatting mechanism The MIP Baseline 2 uses: An improved version of the DEM for data replication. The improvements will be based on the use of the latest version of the ATCCIS Replication Mechanism, the reduction of bandwidth requirements, the use of a more granular information exchange contracts in a way similar to Baseline 1 MEM messages and by prioritising the information flows. The MEM will be use for writer to reader messages only (not for data replication). In future Baselines MIP will be expanded to extend the panoply of interoperability services provided (messaging, Web, Directory, Security, collaboration…). As previously stated, the requirements for which have been captured in the MTIR and it will be the road map for the future which will allow a graduated incorporation of improvements into subsequent baselines. NATO DEGREE 4.A INTEROPERABILITY Translation and formatting mechanism NATO LEVEL 5 INTERCONNECTIVITY Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 19

Organisation Members MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 FULL MEMBERS CAN TacC2IS DNK DACCIS FRA SICF, SIR DEU HEROS-2/1 ITA SIACCON NLD ISIS NOR NORTaC/NORCCIS ESP SIMACET TUR TACCIS GBR ATacCS/ComBAT USA MCS ASSOCIATE MEMBERS AUS JCCS, BCSS LTU TAVVIS AUT PHOENIX POL SZAFRAN BEL ISIS PRT SICCE BUL FICIS ROU SIAAB CZE GF-TCCS SVN SITAWARE FIN FINACCIS SWE ISMARK,SLB GRC HARCCIS ACT BiSC - AIS HUN HAVIR JFC The MIP programme is not a formal NATO programme. Rather it is a voluntary and independent activity by the participating nations and organizations. The nations and HQs that are active in the MIP programme are shown above. The MIP consists of Full Members (nations only) and Associate Members (nation and non-nation entities). Full Members: Are nations that commit to support the collaborative development of succeeding versions of the MIP interoperability solution suitable for fielding. They must express intention to field that solution. Full Members have signed the MIP Statement of Intent (SOI) regarding their participation in MIP. Undertake to be represented in all WGs and must be prepared to expend the resources required to develop and sustain the solution. Must be involved in and contribute actively to the decision-making process throughout the specification and development cycle. have voting and access rights at all meetings. Associate Members include nations and non-nation entities such as military agencies and formations, showing an interest in this programme. This status is granted by the MIP Steering Group (MSG). They enjoy all the rights and privileges of a Full Member, except they do not have any voting rights at meetings. Associate members need not to support all MSG/PMG and WG meetings. Of course they have to accept the terms of the SOI. *Country codes according NATO STANAG 1059 Ed 8. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 20

Enhanced MIP History MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 1980 1990 2000 MERGING (SOI) 2001 MoA 2004 MERGING 1998 QIP NDAG: NATO Data Administration Group NDAG The “Enhanced MIP” is the result of a long history of “merges”. Different initiatives in search for information interoperability between C2ISs have appeared along the last 20 years. Precursors of the current MIP are showed in this slide. QIP, BIP and ATCCIS are the foundations of MIP as it is known today. “Enhanced MIP” has inherited their background and experience. On February 04, MIP and NATO Data Administration Group signed a Memorandum of Agreement stating their intent to collaborate data modelling efforts in order to produce a Joint Consultation Command & Control Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM). First version of JC3IEDM v 3.0 (STANAG 5525) is alredy released. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 21

Organisation MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 MIP Steering Group (MSG) Chair Vice Chair Programme Management Group (PMG) Chair Vice Chair Operational Working Group (OWG) Systems Engineering & Architecture Working Group (SEAWG) Data Modelling Working Group (DMWG) Test & Evaluation Working Group (TEWG) Configuration Control Working Group (CCWG) Chair Deputy NDAG MIP is organised into 7 working groups with an executive management body and a high level steering group for resources, policy and targets. At the working group level, the Multidisciplinary Working Parties (MDWP) with experts from the various Working Groups is the paradigm. These MDWPs can be created at the behest of either the PMG or MSG for particular tasks and will draw their resources from the existing working groups. Rigour is maintained by the adoption of recognised system engineering practices. In addition to the interface specification and the exchange mechanisms, MIP also produces supporting products covering programme management, security policy, test schedules, configuration management, representative data fills, and international liaison. In terms of commitment, the MSG meets twice a year for three days. The PMG and the Working Groups meet four times a year for a week. The meetings are usually in Greding (Germany). There are 65 people at the MSG, and more than 130 at the PMG and WGs. A rough estimation is that MIP nations spend about $1-2M national effort per annum. There is no multilateral transfer of funds. Multi-Disciplinary Working Parties (MDWPs) Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 22

IOT&E MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Confirm the operational fieldability of the MEM and DEM in accordance with MTIR v. 1.0 requirements. EDE (NL), Sep ’03 11 nations, 13 TOCs, 550 visitors, 394 participants. MIP scheduled 79 days for testing MIP Baseline 1. The Integrated Operational Test & Evaluation took place in EDE (NL), in September It involved the national systems with soldiers. The IOT&E objectives were: Confirm the operational fieldability of the MEM in accordance with MTIR Baseline 1 requirements. Test and evaluation of the operational fieldability of the DEM in accordance with the MTIR Baseline 1. Test and evaluate coexistence of MEM and DEM implementations of MIP Baseline 1.0 There were 11 nations playing (13 participating), 13 Tactical Command posts, 12 different national C2IS deployed, 13 MIP interfaces deployed, 394 participants, approx 550 visitors, 70 hrs scenario played and more than 1200 events played. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 23

IOT&E ORBAT and C2ISs MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 SHAPE LCCIS PO SICCE XXX SP SIMACET II FR SIR SP SIMACET XX FR SICF DK DACCIS X IT SIACCON UK ATacCS /ComBAT NO NACCIS GE Heros NL ISIS US MCS CA LFCS The first 11 MIP conformant systems are those that participated in the Integrated Operational Test & Evaluation: The Canadian LFCS The Danish DACCIS The French SICF and SIR The German Heros The Italian SIACCON The Dutch ISIS The Norwegian NACCIS The Portuguese SICCE The Spanish SIMACET The UK ATacCS/ComBAT The US MCS SHAPE also participated with a prototype of the LCCIS (BiSC AIS), in a purely observer role. National Link MEM & DEM DEM Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 24

IOT&E Findings MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 The MIP Interface performed well and supported the exchange of data necessary to establish the COP Emerging results indicate further development is required in certain areas Current implementations are planned for use in future exercises and can provide an initial operational capability if required. The MIP Interface performed well and supported the exchange of data necessary to establish the COP Emerging results indicate further development is required in certain areas: Operational Procedures for information exchange over the MIP interface need to be further defined, agreed and incorporated into national SOPs MIP Technical specifications need to be “tightened up” National C2IS differ in capability and, therefore, are not able to utilise all exchanged data at the present time Current implementations are planned for use in future exercises and can provide an initial operational capability if required. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 25

Specification Schedule
MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Dec Release of the MIP Baseline 1 Feb MOA with NDAG Oct Baseline 2 Tests start Oct Feb & April Operational Level Test & Assessment Dec Release of the MIP Baseline 2 A MIP baseline is a specification of an interoperability solution that has been formally reviewed and agreed upon, that thereafter serves as the basis for further development, and can be changed only through formal change control procedures. After the Integrated Operational Test and Evaluation in September 2003, a final review of the MIP specifications took place, incorporating the Exercise Lessons Learned. This review led to the publication of the first baseline and were published in Dec 2003. The test period for Baseline 2 will be from October 04 to June 05, followed by three Operational Level Tests & Assessments in October 05, February 06 and May 06. After that, the Baseline 2 will be reviewed, approved and subsequently released. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 26

MIP Adoption & Stability
MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 NATO Corporate Data Model BiSC AIS Land Functional Services NATO C3 Technical Architecture NATO Force Goal HRF(L) / NRF The MIP is involved in the following activities and standards: The LC2IEDM, was the core of the NATO Reference Model and was also a view model of NATO Corporate Data Model (STANAG 5523/AdatP-32). Such a STANAG is became obsolete as the NATO JC3IEDM (STANAG 5525) was born. Implementation of the MIP specification is a NATO Force Goal (EL2802 and ER2802). NATO Policy on MIP calls for close co-ordination and re-use of the MIP specification within NATO. Bi-SC Automated Information System (AIS) will use the MIP solution in its Land Functional Services (LandFS) to interface to national CCIS, either in HRF/LRF, CJTF or other crisis response operation or exercise. The MIP specification is well regarded in the NC3A. It is the core capability of the NC3A Integrated Data Environment prototype, a capability to integrate legacy systems. The MIP specification is included in the NATO C3 Technical Architecture. The NATO Military Criteria for High Readiness Forces (Land) Headquarters requires the use of an ATCCIS/MIP compliant land information system. The NATO Response Force (NRF) requirements call for the use of MIP compliant interoperability solution. Many national C2 information systems implement MIP specifications. NATO Standardisation Agreement NATO Policy National C2IS Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 27

Summary MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Firm Foundations Proven Concept NATO Buy-in (NDAG MoA) National Commitment Clear Roadmap to the Future Return of investment by: Manageability Legacy-tolerant Evolutionary Standard MIP has a good pedigree and has shown its willingness to evolve to the changing situation. It is based around a proven concept that delivers capability. MIP has a strong NATO buy in reinforced by the recent signing of an Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the MIP and NATO Data Administration Group (NDAG). Nations are committed to fielding the solution either in the early stage of Baseline one or with a more definite commitment to fielding a Baseline two solution. The return of investment that the MIP members obtain are due to: Manageability. Does not attempt to dictate internals of every system; Focused on seams. Legacy-tolerant. Does not always assume or require changes to internals of systems. System owners can change internal implementations with less fear of unintended consequences. Evolutionary. Systems free to incorporate & adapt to new technology & requirements. Standard. It is gaining momentum as we saw in the previous slide. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 28

MIP Website MIP Standard Briefing 8 December 2006 Or access to the MIP Website at which contains all the latest information relevant to MIP and all the baseline documentation. Access to certain areas is restricted to members of MIP and can be granted by the MSG on an individual basis. Unclassified MIP © MIP Unclassified Page 29

MIP Standard Briefing 8 December Dec 2006

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "MIP Standard Briefing 8 December Dec 2006"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

MIP Standard Briefing 8 December Dec 2006

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "MIP Standard Briefing 8 December Dec 2006"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback