Information AboutDodaf |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ARCHITECTURE FRAMEWORK | |
| united states department of defense | |
| architecture framework | |
| enterprise architecture | |
|
While DoDAF is clearly aimed at military systems, it has broad applicability across the private, public and voluntary sectors involved around the world. It is especially suited to large systems with complex integration and interoperability challenges, and is apparently unique in its use of "operational views" detailing the external customer's operating domain in which the developing system will operate (ref. Zachman Framework ). Like other EA approaches (particularly TOGAF ), DoDAF is organized around a shared repository to hold work products. The repository is defined by the Core Architecture Data Model (CADM -- essentially a common database schema) and the DoD Architecture Repository System (DARS). A key feature of DoDAF is interoperability, which is organized as a series of levels, called Levels of Information System Interoperability (LISI). The developing system must not only meet its internal data needs but also those of the operational framework into which it is set. DODAF ARTIFACT VIEWS DoDAF views are organized into four basic view sets: overarching All View (AV), Operational View (OV), Systems View (SV), and the Technical Standards View (TV). Only a subset of the full DoDAF viewset is usually created for each system development. All View (AV) All View (AV) products provide overarching descriptions of the entire architecture and define the scope and context of the architecture. The AV products are defined as:
Operational View (OV) The OV products provide descriptions of the tasks and activities, operational elements, and information exchanges required to accomplish DoD missions. The OV provides textual and graphical representations of operational nodes and elements, assigned tasks and activities, and information flows between nodes. It defines the type of information exchanged, the frequency of exchanges, the tasks and activities supported by these exchanges and the nature of the exchanges. The OV products are defined as:
Systems View (SV) The SV products provide graphical and textual descriptions of systems and system interconnections that provide or support DoD functions. Interconnections between systems defined in the OV are described in the SVs. The SV products are:
Technical Standards View (TV) The TV products define technical standards, implementation conventions, business rules and criteria that govern the architecture. The TV products are as follows:
Creating an integrated architecture using DoDAF DoDAF v1.0 listed the following products as the “minimum set of products required to satisfy the definition of an OV, SV and TV.” One note: while the DoDAF does not list the OV-1 artifact as a core product, its development is strongly encouraged. The sequence of the artifacts listed below gives a suggested order in which the artifacts could be developed. The actual sequence of view generation and their potential customization is a function of the application domain and the specific needs of the effort.
REPRESENTATION Representations for the DoDAF products may be drawn from many diagramming techniques including: Tables , ICAM Definition Language , Entity-Relationship Diagrams (ERDs), UML / SysML , and other custom techniques depending on the product, tool used, and contractor/customer preferences. There is a UPDM (UML Profile for DoDAF and MODAF) effort within the OMG to standardize the representation of DoDAF products when UML is used. DoDAF generically describes in the representation of the artifacts to be generated, but allows considerable flexibility regarding the specific formats and modeling techniques. The DoDAF deskbook provides examples in using traditional Systems Engineering and Data Engineering techniques, and secondly, UML format. DoDAF proclaims latitude in work product format, without professing one diagramming technique over another. In addition to graphical representation, there is typically a requirement to provide Metadata to the Defense Information Technology Portfolio Repository (DITPR) or other architectural repositories. TOOLS A number of development tools help enterprise architects create the artifacts (two of which of listed below): Other tools provide full repositories of these artifacts VERSIONS AND TIMELINE
SEE ALSO
EXTERNAL LINKS
HARMONIZATION BETWEEN NATIONAL ARCHITECTURE FRAMEWORKS There is an OMG effort to standardise a UML Profile for military architecture frameworks UPDM (UML Profile for DoDAF and MODAF ). In addition, the IDEAS Group is a four nation (Australia, Canada, UK, USA + NATO as observers) effort to standardise a conceptual model for military architecture frameworks. |
|
|