1. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards Tom Merkle CapWIN Standards Manager tmerkle@capwin.org OASIS Emergency Management Technical Committee (EM TC) Member Chair of the Infrastructure Sub Committee (IF SC) Emergency Data Exchange Language (EDXL) Working Group Member Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

2. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards OASIS is a not-for-profit, international consortium that drives the development, convergence, and adoption of e-business standards. The consortium produces more Web services standards than any other organization along with standards for security, e-business, and standardization efforts in the public sector and for application-specific markets. Founded in 1993, OASIS has more than 4,000 participants representing over 600 organizations and individual members in 100 countries. http://www.oasis-open.org/home/index.php

3. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards OASIS is distinguished by its transparent governance and operating procedures. Members themselves set the OASIS technical agenda, using a lightweight process expressly designed to promote industry consensus and unite disparate efforts. Completed work is ratified by open ballot. Governance is accountable and unrestricted. Consortium leadership is based on individual merit and is not tied to financial contribution, corporate standing, or special appointment.

4. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards The Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) is the OASIS Emergency Management Technical Committee’s first standard for homeland security and civil emergency management. CAP is a simple, flexible data interchange format for collecting and distributing “all-hazard” safety notifications and emergency warnings over information networks and public alerting systems. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

5. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards Background November 2000 the National Science and Technology Council released a report on “Effective Disaster Warnings.” One key recommendation of the blue-ribbon panel was that “a standard method should be developed to collect and relay instantaneously and automatically all types of hazard warnings and reports locally, regionally and nationally for input into a wide variety of dissemination systems.” Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

6. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards Background 2001 an international working group of more than 120 emergency managers and emergency information technologists developed initial requirements and a straw man design for CAP. 2002 that effort was adopted by the Partnership for Public Warning (PPW), a national public- private partnership of agencies, vendors and academic experts. 2003 PPW sponsored CAP into the OASIS standards process for refinement and testing. 2004 CAP 1.0 released as an OASIS standard. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

7. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards Compatibility and Flexibility CAP is a content standard, deliberately designed to be “transport-agnostic.” In web-services applications, CAP provides a lightweight standard for exchanging urgent notifications. CAP can also be used in data-broadcast applications and over legacy data networks. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

8. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards Compatibility and Flexibility CAP provides compatibility with all kinds of information and public alerting systems, including those designed for multilingual and special-needs populations. CAP is fully compatible with the existing national broadcast Emergency Alert System (EAS) 2003 whitepaper describes details of the CAP/EAS interface: http://www.incident.com/cap/docs/aps/Advanced _EAS_Concept.pdf” Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

9. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards Compatibility and Flexibility CAP incorporates geospatial elements based on Open GIS Consortium recommendations to permit flexible but precise geographic targeting of alerts. It provides for associating digital images and other binary information with alerts. It supports various mechanisms for ensuring message authenticity, integrity and confidentiality (where required) including in particular the work of the OASIS Web Services Security and PKI Technical Committees. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

10. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards U.S. Department of Justice’s “Global Justice XML Data Model” Department of Defense NORTHCOM National Weather Service United States Geological Survey California Office of Emergency Services Capital Wireless Integrated Network (CapWIN) GeoDecisions, Inc. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) E Team Blue292 Warning Systems, Inc. Comlabs, Inc. mobileFoundations Ship Analytics MyStateUSA IEM, Inc. Hormann America, Inc. Oregon RAINS NDS, Ltd. Implementors

11. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards Additional Information Resources CAP 1.0 Specification –http://www.oasis- open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency/download.php/5666/emer gency-CAP-1.0.pdf (PDF 234 kb) XML Cover Pages article on CAP 1.0 –http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2004-02-26-a.html Partnership for Public Warning –http://www.partnershipforpublicwarning.org/ppw/cap.html Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

12. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards DoD – DHS XML Message Use The following slides are from a non-classified USNORTHCOM presentation and are included in this presentation to illustrate the use of CAP and other XML schemas. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)

13. GOALS Per direction of USNORTHCOM –Formalize JPEN – ASOCC interface –Facilitate sharing of FPCON status messages between systems –Implementation to be capable of supporting other types of message transactions in the future if desired –Understand cost and schedule impacts to current activities IMPP Pilot –Elements of above goals are being met by SPAWAR San Diego as part of IMPP pilot activity –How can this work be best incorporated into a “production” solution

14. Message Structures ASOCC ASOCC Events –ASOCC specific XML Alerts –CAP compliant XML FPCON Change –ASOCC specific XML JPEN JPEN Events –JPEN Specific XML events_v2.1.xsd JPEN Alerts –JPEN specific XML Alerts_v2.1.xsd FPCON Change –JPEN specific XML fpCondition_v2.1.xsd IMPP has implemented JPEN to CAP translations for some (all?) message types

15. Current Interface (notional) Hybrid 2.1 Web Server Region 2 JPEN Server Foundation Alert Framework Format: CAP XML Protocol: SOAP Security: SSL Hybrid 2.1 Web Server Region 1 Hybrid 2.1 Web Server Region n Subscription Engine IMPP Server Format: CAP XML Protocol: SOAP Security: SSL Format: CAP XML Protocol: SOAP Security: SSL

16. DAHLGREN CIVIL SECTOR SIMCELL Post CAP alerts with incident report “attachments” per MSEL Receive CAP alerts with “attachments” per MSEL Tools: U.S. NORTHERN COMMAND Civilian Sector (Unclassified but Sensitive) Military (Unclassified but Sensitive) Military (Classified) Local Community (ICP/EOC) State / Region (EOC) National (HSOC) DMIS Interoperability Backbone Alert Framework “Filter” Service – Candidates MI2 and HLD_HLS ISS “The Real McCoy’s” Post IPC CONOPS EREMSR Backbone RIJAN FRCTS ASOCC / HOLS DMIS Tools Blue 292 WebEOC Others? ASOCC / HOLS SWARM? JWARN Installation (OC) Component Command (OC) NORTHCOM / NMCC JWARN ASOCC / HOLS JWARN