| SECTION 1 |
|---|
1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to define the United States Imagery and Geospatial Information System (USIGS) Technical Architecture (UTA) view for the Imagery & Geospatial Community (IGC). Key documents in the definition and use of the UTA include the Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) Architecture Framework [C4ISR97], the USIGS Architecture Framework (UAF) [UAF98], and the Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Technical Architecture (JTA) [JTA98].
The USIGS is the extensive network of systems used by the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Intelligence Community that share and exploit imagery, imagery intelligence, and geospatial information. These systems provide capabilities involved with the integrated information management, collection, production, exploitation, dissemination and archive, and infrastructure of this information. Organizations which have some level of interface with USIGS, but are not part of DoD and the Intelligence Community, are considered participants in USIGS if they adhere to the technical and system standards [NSP97].
The IGC is the composition of cooperating commands, services, agencies, and departments within the United States Government, foreign governments, and private sector organizations involved in the acquisition, production and exploitation, and dissemination of imagery, imagery intelligence, and geospatial information. The IGC fosters extensive partnerships with others, including commercial and academic institutions, to collaboratively work together to share information [NSP97]. The IGC represents a domain of specialization and a corresponding community of specialists that cut across organizational boundaries. The scope of this domain is the union of these areas of specialization: mapping, charting, geodesy, imagery, and imagery intelligence. In this document, this collection of areas of specialization will be referred to as MCG&I (mapping, charting, geodesy, and imagery).
The UTA has the following interrelated goals:
1.2 Scope of the UTA
The scope of the UTA is the set of information technology (IT) and IT-related services and interfaces that support the IGC in the development and maintenance of the USIGS. These IT services and interfaces, grouped into functional areas, are defined by standards, specifications, conventions and guidelines. The UTA includes MCG&I services, interfaces, and USIGS unique specifications, as well as more general, commercial IT services and interfaces.
Documents superseded. This revision of the UTA supersedes all earlier technical architecture and standards mandates provided in the following documents:
1.2.1 Applicability of the UTA
1.2.1.1 Acquisition Activities
The UTA identifies and defines information technology standards, services, and their interfaces, which must be incorporated into USIGS systems to support interoperability requirements. The UTA will be a compliance document on all new USIGS development programs placed on contract after 26 January 1999, the publish date of this document. For new acquisitions, it is expected that Program Managers will build the appropriate standards compliance requirements into their program baseline from the start.
Migration systems (existing systems that are expected to still be in service after FY2005) will be individually evaluated to determine which UTA standards apply to them and when they must be modified to achieve UTA compliance.
In general, legacy systems (existing systems with a life-span not expected to exceed FY2005) will not be retrofitted for the sole purpose of achieving UTA compliance.
System-specific standards profiles will be created for all new and migration systems and added as appendices to future versions of the UTA. These profiles will be used to support program funding and scheduling decisions and to develop a time-phased migration path to full UTA compliance. The standards profiles will provide NIMA with a means of overseeing and guiding standards implementation in system requirements development, analysis, design, development, and fielding.
1.2.1.2 Organizations
Many organizations, including but not limited to the list in Table 1-1, are considered part of the USIGS community to the extent that they produce, provide, or exchange MCG&I information. DoD Directive 5105.60 [NIMA96] designates the Director, NIMA, as the functional manager for imagery, imagery intelligence, and geospatial investment activities. NIMA has the responsibility of prescribing and mandating standards and technical architectures for MCG&I information for the DoD and the non-DoD elements of the Intelligence Community. This responsibility makes NIMA a key component of the USIGS. Other DoD/government stakeholders assist in the collaboration and co-production of MCG&I data in their specific functional area. International partners assist in the collaboration and co-production in their specific regional area. This information and USIGS data are shared, under formal agreements. International standards bodies such the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) define many of the standards specified for USIGS in this document and in the JTA.
Industry participation in the USIGS community is represented primarily by two consortia who contribute relevant technology and specifications: the Open GIS Consortium, Inc. (OGC) and the Object Management Group (OMG).
Table 1-1. USIGS Stakeholder Organizations
|
DoD |
Other Government |
International |
Industry |
|
|
Commands DIA NIMA JTFs NSA OSD Services |
CIA DoC DoE DoJ NRO State Dept. Treasury Dept. |
DoI DoT FEMA EPA NASA USDA USGS |
Agreements with 114 countries and political entities Standards bodies (e.g., ISO) |
OGC OMG |
Figure 1-1 shows the applicability of systems in various types of organizations to the JTA and USIGS. Each organization that is a stakeholder in USIGS is assumed to have systems that are covered by the UTA, and other (non-USIGS) systems outside the scope of the UTA. Other non-DoD organizations also do not typically have a mandate to follow the JTA.
Figure 1-1. UTA Applicability to Systems in Organizations
1.2.2 Context
1.2.2.1 Architecture Framework
Architectures define the structure of components, their relationships, and the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution over time. The USIGS Architecture Framework document [UAF98] discusses the USIGS architecture components, their roles and relationships, and identifies architecture documentation that needs to be developed to define and evolve an integrated, interoperable USIGS. The USIGS architecture components are based on the C4ISR Architecture Framework 2.0 [C4ISR97].
The interrelated set of USIGS architecture components include the Operational Architecture, the Technical Architecture, the System Architecture, and the Conceptual Data Model (CDM). The USIGS Operational Architecture documentation identifies operational elements, activities, and information flows. The USIGS Technical Architecture (UTA) provides applicable standards and conventions that govern systems implementation and operation. USIGS System Architecture documentation overlays system capabilities onto requirements and identified standards to provide a map of current and future capabilities. The USIGS/CDM provides the common data modeling and terminology baseline needed to articulate and integrate the other component architecture views. An overview of USIGS architecture components is shown in Figure 1-2.
A technical architecture view is a minimal set of rules governing the arrangement, interaction, and interdependence of the parts or elements whose purpose is to ensure that a conformant system satisfies a specified set of requirements. The technical architecture identifies the services, interfaces, standards, and their relationships. It provides the technical guidelines for implementation of systems upon which engineering specifications are based, common building blocks are built, and product lines are developed [C4ISR97].
The USIGS architecture is aimed at implementing the vision stated in the NIMA Business Plan [NBP97]. The NIMA Business Plan drives the USIGS Operational Architecture, which in turn affects the USIGS Technical and System Architectures.
Figure 1-2. USIGS Architecture Components (from [UAF98])
The technical architecture view influences other architectural components and also reflects the software strategy of the overall architecture. The emerging technologies will be a factor in the USIGS Operational Architecture in deriving the business changes based upon those technology implementations. The UTA is a key element in the operational architecture vision. In turn, the UTA is dependent upon the other architectural components. The USIGS Operational Architecture will influence the development and design of software components and applications with input from the legacy and migration components of the system architecture to leverage current software investments. The USIGS "to be" System Architecture (Volume 1) will be driven by the standards selected and identified by the UTA and will be included in specific migration plans and products. The migration plans will also include standards development needed for the specifications of services common within USIGS. In addition, the USIGS/CDM provides data standards cited within the UTA. The linkages between the UTA and other parts of the architecture are illustrated in Figure 1-3.
 A) The UOAD identifies requirements for which services must be provided. The UTA identifies the standards specifications that are necessary to satisfy those requirements. B) The UTA mandates the use of the USIGS Conceptual Data Model (USIGS/CDM), which standardizes data element usage in the USIGS. C) The UTA identifies the Mission Specific Application categories, the MCG&I services, common facilities, distributed computing services, and other platform services for the System Architecture. These applications and services will be used to build the System Architecture Functional Components. The applications and services are also mapped to the Operations Activities identified in the USIGS Operational Architecture. The USIGS Interoperability Profile (UIP) [UIP98] defines the profile for software interface standards to be used to achieve interoperability between multiple clients and servers within the USIGS. The UIP profiles applicable standards and specifications to specific USIGS system components, and this level of detail provides the basis for evaluating compliance. This is a key link between the USIGS Technical Architecture and System Architecture. D) The UTA identifies: 1) applicable formal standards specifications, 2) USIGS-specific specifications, and 3) guidance concerning legacy standards that may be in the form of Interface Control Documents (ICDs) or other forms of specification. |
Figure 1-3. Technical Architecture Relationships
1.2.2.2 Relationship to the DoD Joint Technical Architecture
The DoD JTA, Version 2.0, provides the core of the standards content for the USIGS Technical Architecture. The JTA provides a set of common, open information technology (IT) standards. These standards provide part of the DoD Technical Architecture as defined in the C4ISR Architecture Framework 2.0. The JTA "defines the service areas, interfaces, and standards (JTA elements) applicable to all DoD systems, and its adoption is mandated for the management, development, and acquisition of new or improved systems throughout DoD." [JTA98]. The standards and guidelines in the JTA are the result of collaboration among the Services, Joint Staff, USD(A&T), ASD(C3I), DISA, DIA, and other elements of the Intelligence Community. While Version 1.0 of the JTA was developed and mandated for use in new or upgraded DoD C4I systems, Version 2.0 is mandated for all DoD Information Technology systems to include C4ISR, Sustainment, Weapon Systems, and Modeling and Simulation. The UTA is a profile (as explained in UTA Section 1.5.1.1) of the JTA for the USIGS community.
1.2.3 Summary of UTA Architectural Context
Figure 1-4 summarizes the architectural context of the UTA. The emphasis in this diagram is on architecture views, as defined in the C4ISR Architecture Framework [C4ISR97] and tailored for USIGS by the USIGS Architecture Framework: Operational, System, and Technical Architectures and the core USIGS/CDM that cuts across the other three. The time phasing is shown in the UTA as Current and Emerging. The DoD JTA is the minimum set of information technology standards for use in all new and upgraded DoD information systems. The UTA then profiles the JTA set of standards and specifications for USIGS implementation. In addition, the DII COE is mandated by the JTA as stated in Appendix B of this document. Because the DII COE is an implementation of the JTA, the COE has a more direct influence on the USIGS System Architecture than on the UTA.
Figure 1-4. UTA Architectural Context
1.3 Considerations in Using the UTA
The UTA content is directly linked to the DoD JTA 2.0 [JTA98]. The UTA is intended to be used by anyone involved in the management, development, or acquisition of new or upgraded USIGS elements. USIGS component developers are expected to use the UTA, in conjunction with the JTA, to ensure that new and upgraded systems (and the interfaces to such systems) meet interoperability requirements. USIGS system integrators shall use it to facilitate the integration of existing and new elements within USIGS. Operational requirements developers shall be cognizant of the UTA and the JTA in developing USIGS requirements and functional descriptions.
The UTA is and will remain a "forward-looking" document that will assist in the acquisition and development of USIGS systems. The UTA is NOT a catalog of all information technology standards used within existing NIMA and IGC systems. The UTA Profile mandates information technology standards that should be incorporated in the requirements specifications of new and upgraded USIGS systems.
Standards required to maintain backward compatibility with legacy or migration systems are not mandated in this document, but such standards can be used as necessary, in addition to-not in place of-mandated standards.
UTA Implementation
Specific system implementation of the standards contained in this document is the responsibility of each USIGS program manager. To assist in evaluating implementation of the UTA, a Standards Compliance Checklist is provided in the Addendum to the UTA. This checklist can be used by USIGS program managers, acquisition personnel, and development contractors to gauge compliance with the USIGS Technical Architecture. However, the UTA document does NOT contain specific guidance on implementing the UTA. Please refer to the following USIGS and NIMA documents for additional information on the implementation of the USIGS Architecture:
1.4 Control and Update of the UTA
Because of the continual development of new information technology and supporting IT standards, the UTA will be revised at reasonable, announced intervals. The document is controlled by the NIMA Configuration Control Board (NCCB) and administered by the NIMA Systems Engineering & Integration Division (SOS), Engineering Branch (SOSE). The content of UTA, in terms of standards, conventions, and guidelines, is developed in concert with the overall activities and products of the USIGS Architecture Integration Group (AIG). The content is established by coordinating with members of the IGC. The UTA standards will continue to be based on the JTA as it evolves. The UTA Standards Technology Forecast will be updated in concert with the NIMA Technology Office (ST/T).
1.5 Content and Structure of Document
The USIGS Architecture Framework contains a tailored set of USIGS architecture products that has been identified for each Architecture component, as derived from the C4ISR approach (see Figure 1-5). These products present architectural information in a consistent way to serve as a foundation for the analysis, definition, and migration of the USIGS Architecture. Note that the UAF expands upon the C4ISR Architecture Framework by separating Migration Planning products from the System Architecture.
The Technical Architecture products shown in this figure are the Technical Architecture Profile and Standards Technology Forecast. These products, as well as where each product is included in the UTA, are delineated and described below.
Figure 1-5. USIGS Architecture Products
1.5.1.1 The USIGS Technical Architecture Profile (UTAP)
Technical Reference Model(s) (TRM)
The DoD TRM is extended for the USIGS to show in more detail the necessary support for MCG&I services, and for distributed object computing, as defined by the Object Management Group's (OMG's) Object Management Architecture (OMA). This extended model defines a set of services and interfaces common to the USIGS, and provides the construct to identify where standards are needed and where competing standards exist. The intent is to place the USIGS on a transition path toward a target environment characterized by distributed object computing and open, interoperable systems.
The TRM is addressed in Section 2 of the UTA, and more details of the MCG&I domain services are given in Appendix A.
Mandated Profile of the DoD Joint Technical Architecture
The profile of the DoD JTA is for use by the IGC. Thus, it is the approved list of standards for implementation within the USIGS. The profile is organized by reference model service categories and contains the minimum set of mandatory standards for each service area with which a system must comply if implementing that particular service. The standards profile cites the standards reference, a brief description and status of each standard and any supporting profile.
A standards profile is a set of one or more base standards, and, where applicable, the identification of chosen classes, subsets, options, and parameters of those base standards, necessary for accomplishing a particular function. A standards profile may contain individual standards that may be further defined by separate, authoritative documents, each of which is referred to as a 'profile' or a 'profile of a standard'. Each such profile further refines the implementation of the original standard to ensure interoperability.
The mandated profile is addressed in Section 3 and Section 4.
Conventions and Guidelines
1.5.1.2 The USIGS Standards Technology Forecast
Conventions are process or procedure specifications, not formally approved by an accepted standards organization, that describe organizational practices essential to information technology implementation. In the USIGS, conventions are agreed to within the IGC, and-like standards-are mandated in order to maximize interoperability.
Guidelines are recommended, but not required, practices. Whenever possible, USIGS guidelines will be aligned with those from other communities with which the USIGS must interoperate.
Conventions and guidelines are addressed in Section 5.
Emerging Technical Reference Model(s)
Emerging TRMs are models that are of interest to the IGC and are candidates for incorporation in, or may influence, the future evolution of the current TRM. Emerging TRMs may already be well established or may be in development.
Emerging TRMs are not addressed in this revision of the UTA but may be added in future revisions.
Emerging Standards
Emerging standards are standards that are candidates for possible addition to the UTA mandate. The purpose of listing these candidates is to help the program manager determine those areas that are likely to change in the near term and suggest those areas in which "upgradability" should be a concern. The expectation is that emerging standards will be elevated to mandatory status when implementations of the standards mature. Emerging standards may be implemented, but shall not be used in lieu of a mandated standard.
Emerging standards are addressed in Section 3 and Section 4.
Emerging Technologies
Emerging technologies are technologies expected to result in new standards that will have a significant affect on the IGC and USIGS.
Emerging technologies are addressed in Section 6.
1.5.2 Structure
The UTA is organized into six sections, six appendices, and one addendum. The organization, summarized in Table 1-2, differs somewhat from the above product list organization. Specifically, the time phasing (mandated versus emerging standards) is incorporated within each architecture service area in Section 3 and Section 4. The rationale is that this organization provides users involved in system planning and acquisition a clearer picture of how each set of standards is evolving.
The distinction between Section 3 and Section 4 is as follows: Section 3 addresses application platform standards, and is therefore focused on exceptions and additions to the JTA platform standards. Section 4 addresses application software standards and specifications, which are not generally addressed in the JTA. Therefore, Section 4 relies on non-JTA sources, primarily the OMG and the OGC. Taken together, Section 3 and Section 4 provide a collective profile of the JTA. The complete mandated profile, including applicable JTA standards, is presented in the Addendum.
Table 1-2. UTA Document Structure
|
Section |
Element |
Description |
| Section 1 |
Introduction |
Purpose, Scope, Applicability, Context, USIGS considerations in using the UTA |
| Section 2 |
Technical Reference Model |
A framework by which USIGS services are organized and standards are applied; represents a DoD TRM extension in which distributed object computing and open MCG&I services are emphasized |
| Section 3 |
Application Platform Entity Standards |
A set of mandated and emerging standards profiling the JTA, used to collectively standardize USIGS application platform interfaces and services |
| Section 4 |
Application Software Entity Standards |
Current and emerging interface specifications from OMG, OGC, and other sources, used to collectively standardize USIGS application software interfaces and services |
| Section 5.1 |
USIGS Conventions |
A non-standardized but binding specification of practices within USIGS implementations. Certain conventions are needed for enforcement both internal and external to the USIGS enterprise. |
| Section 5.2 |
USIGS Guidelines |
A non-binding specification of rules or accepted methods for implementing USIGS. |
| Section 6 |
Standards Technology Forecast |
Technology being developed but not yet standardized, judged to be important to USIGS |
| Appendix A |
MCG&I Domain Services |
Detailed description of the MCG&I Domain Services part of the reference model |
| Appendix B |
UTA Relationship to DII COE |
Brief description of DII COE, its mandate in the JTA, and its relationship to the UTA |
| Appendix C |
Product Specifications |
List of current NIMA product specifications; part of the guidelines |
| Appendix D |
Acronyms |
Acronyms used in the UTA |
| Appendix E |
USIGS Glossary Extract |
Key terms from the USIGS Glossary used in the UTA |
| Appendix F |
References |
Document References in the UTA |
| Addendum |
Standards Summary and Compliance Checklist |
Complete list of USIGS Mandatory standards and specifications, including applicable JTA standards, and Checklist for determining compliance of a system with UTA standards |
| Front Page | Next Section |
|---|