Military Communications and Information Technology: A Trusted ...
Military Communications and Information Technology: A Trusted ... Military Communications and Information Technology: A Trusted ...
118 Military Communications and Information Technology... in ad-hoc coalitions, and between military and civil communication systems, within the communications constraints of mobile tactical forces. The group has focused on practical application of information infrastructure technologies in a network-of-networks, consisting of a variety of low capability network technologies. The work done within the CoNSIS group has been divided into a number of tasks, each focusing on a different aspect of interoperability issues. This paper focuses on the work done by Task 2, which, together with [1], covers the domain of SOA and its application in limited capacity networks. During June 2012 CoNSIS conducted a large-scale experiment in Greding, Germany, in which all the different aspects of technical interoperability were tested; integrating the work of all the task groups of CoNSIS. II. Background For Task 2, the goal of the CoNSIS experimentation was to show that by using the Web service standards specified by the NNEC CES as interoperability enablers, independent implementations are able to interoperate with only the service specifications as a common reference. The reasoning behind focusing on standards as a means of achieving interoperability was that it enables us to evaluate not only the implementations used, but also the standards themselves. In other words, we can assess how suitable the standards specified in the NNEC CES are for use in tactical networks. A. SOA challenges Assessing Web services (and other SOA implementation approaches) through the use of standards based experimentation is not new; multiple other experiments covering several topics of Web service interoperability have been performed previously. One of the most recent of these was the “Making Services Interoperable” – experiment conducted by the NATO RTO IST-090 working group last year [2]. In this experiment, three different SOA-based information infrastructures were connected together and interoperability was achieved. This experiment does however differ from the CoNSIS experiment in multiple ways: • The CoNSIS experiment network was considerably more complex than the network used duing the IST-090 experiments. This added complexity meant larger fluctuations in the network conditions experienced by the Web service frameworks being used. • The IST-090 experiment focused on service invocation, while the CoNSIS experiment covers both service discovery and service invocation. • IST-090 managed to achieve interoperability between both Web service and Data Distribution Service (DDS) implementations of SOA, but this required the use of specialized gateways which only supported some service types.
Chapter 2: Communications and Information Technology for Trusted... 119 The CoNSIS experiments are limited to Web service based implementations only, which allows for a more generic approach to service interoperability. • The CoNSIS experiment was performed using an IPv6 network, while the IST-090 experiment was done on IPv4. This difference meant that there were additional challenges imposed on the CoNSIS experimentation as the support for IPv6 in pre-existing software and software development tools is limited. There were primarily two NNEC core services that we wanted to test with respect to interoperability, namely service discovery and publish/subscribe. In addition, we also saw the need for focusing on topics, which is a method for classifying information, and as such constitutes the intersection between service discovery and publish/subscribe. These three areas are further described in the following sections. B. Experimentation networks The CoNSIS land mobile part of the network consists of contributions from Germany and Norway. In addition to four German and four Norwegian mobile nodes located on military vehicles, there was also an NGO vehicle. However, this NGO vehicle was not used in the SOA experiments and will therefore not be further described in this paper. Fig. 1 shows the parts of the CoNSIS network that was being using during the SOA experiments. Figure 1. CoNSIS network, initial configuration Two different radio types were used. This is partly because Germany and Norway do not have the same radio systems, but also because different wireless
- Page 67 and 68: Chapter 1: Concepts and Solutions f
- Page 69 and 70: Chapter 1: Concepts and Solutions f
- Page 71 and 72: Selected Aspects of Effective RCIED
- Page 73 and 74: Chapter 1: Concepts and Solutions f
- Page 75 and 76: Chapter 1: Concepts and Solutions f
- Page 77 and 78: Chapter 1: Concepts and Solutions f
- Page 79 and 80: Chapter 1: Concepts and Solutions f
- Page 81: Chapter 1: Concepts and Solutions f
- Page 84 and 85: 84 Military Communications and Info
- Page 86 and 87: 86 Military Communications and Info
- Page 88 and 89: 88 Military Communications and Info
- Page 90 and 91: 90 Military Communications and Info
- Page 92 and 93: 92 Military Communications and Info
- Page 94 and 95: 94 Military Communications and Info
- Page 96 and 97: 96 Military Communications and Info
- Page 98 and 99: 98 Military Communications and Info
- Page 100 and 101: 100 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 103: Chapter 2 Communications and Inform
- Page 106 and 107: 106 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 108 and 109: 108 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 110 and 111: 110 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 112 and 113: 112 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 114 and 115: 114 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 116 and 117: 116 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 120 and 121: 120 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 122 and 123: 122 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 124 and 125: 124 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 126 and 127: 126 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 128 and 129: 128 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 130 and 131: 130 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 132 and 133: 132 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 134 and 135: 134 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 136 and 137: 136 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 138 and 139: 138 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 140 and 141: 140 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 142 and 143: 142 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 144 and 145: 144 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 146 and 147: 146 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 149 and 150: Use of Cross Domain Guards for CoNS
- Page 151 and 152: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 153 and 154: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 155 and 156: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 157 and 158: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 159: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 162 and 163: 162 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 164 and 165: 164 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 166 and 167: 166 Military Communications and Inf
118 <strong>Military</strong> <strong>Communications</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Information</strong> <strong>Technology</strong>...<br />
in ad-hoc coalitions, <strong>and</strong> between military <strong>and</strong> civil communication systems,<br />
within the communications constraints of mobile tactical forces.<br />
The group has focused on practical application of information infrastructure<br />
technologies in a network-of-networks, consisting of a variety of low capability<br />
network technologies. The work done within the CoNSIS group has been divided<br />
into a number of tasks, each focusing on a different aspect of interoperability issues.<br />
This paper focuses on the work done by Task 2, which, together with [1], covers<br />
the domain of SOA <strong>and</strong> its application in limited capacity networks. During June<br />
2012 CoNSIS conducted a large-scale experiment in Greding, Germany, in which all<br />
the different aspects of technical interoperability were tested; integrating the work<br />
of all the task groups of CoNSIS.<br />
II. Background<br />
For Task 2, the goal of the CoNSIS experimentation was to show that by using<br />
the Web service st<strong>and</strong>ards specified by the NNEC CES as interoperability enablers,<br />
independent implementations are able to interoperate with only the service<br />
specifications as a common reference. The reasoning behind focusing on st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
as a means of achieving interoperability was that it enables us to evaluate not only<br />
the implementations used, but also the st<strong>and</strong>ards themselves. In other words,<br />
we can assess how suitable the st<strong>and</strong>ards specified in the NNEC CES are for use<br />
in tactical networks.<br />
A. SOA challenges<br />
Assessing Web services (<strong>and</strong> other SOA implementation approaches) through<br />
the use of st<strong>and</strong>ards based experimentation is not new; multiple other experiments<br />
covering several topics of Web service interoperability have been performed previously.<br />
One of the most recent of these was the “Making Services Interoperable”<br />
– experiment conducted by the NATO RTO IST-090 working group last year [2].<br />
In this experiment, three different SOA-based information infrastructures were connected<br />
together <strong>and</strong> interoperability was achieved. This experiment does however<br />
differ from the CoNSIS experiment in multiple ways:<br />
• The CoNSIS experiment network was considerably more complex<br />
than the network used duing the IST-090 experiments. This added complexity<br />
meant larger fluctuations in the network conditions experienced<br />
by the Web service frameworks being used.<br />
• The IST-090 experiment focused on service invocation, while the CoNSIS<br />
experiment covers both service discovery <strong>and</strong> service invocation.<br />
• IST-090 managed to achieve interoperability between both Web service <strong>and</strong><br />
Data Distribution Service (DDS) implementations of SOA, but this required<br />
the use of specialized gateways which only supported some service types.