1 / 10

Dynamic Coalitions (DC) Research Program

Dynamic Coalitions (DC) Research Program. Joint Information Assurance & Survivability (IA&S) Principal Investigator Meeting Honolulu, Hawaii 17-21 July 2000 Douglas Maughan 703-696-2373 dmaughan@darpa.mil. DC - History of Coalitions. World War II

aure
Download Presentation

Dynamic Coalitions (DC) Research Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dynamic Coalitions (DC)Research Program Joint Information Assurance & Survivability (IA&S) Principal Investigator MeetingHonolulu, Hawaii17-21 July 2000 Douglas Maughan 703-696-2373 dmaughan@darpa.mil

  2. DC - History of Coalitions • World War II • Britain fighting alone - 5 separate battle fronts • U.S. joined after Pearl Harbor • Churchill made several trips to discuss UK-Russia agreements against Germany • Churchill spent 3 weeks in U.S. to establish “coalition” plans for war against Germany and Japan - only between US and UK • Separate talks were held with other partners - more time • Initial foundations for the formation of the United Nations - static, not dynamic

  3. Dynamic CoalitionsRecent Lessons Learned • Gulf War • Communications are still plagued by incompatibilities between services, inadequacies between levels of command, as well as by technical limitations and old, incompatible equipment • Bosnia • The size of communications pipes was not sufficient to meet the demands of the operation (problems were experienced at all levels - strategic, theater, and tactical) • Kosovo • Lack of interoperable secure communications, among the allies, forced reliance on non-secure methods that compromised operational security. • Ground-based communications capabilities in Europe were used to their full capacity, and needed to be augmented during the operation to facilitate rapid dissemination of large volumes of data needed by commanders to prosecute the air war.

  4. Dynamic CoalitionsLessons Learned: Related URLs • http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/mrk/mrk_s05.htm • http://es.rice.edu/projects/Poli378/Gulf/aspin_rpt.html • http://call.army.mil/call/spc_prod/ccrp/lessons/bostoc.htm • http://call.army.mil/call/fmso/fmsopubs/issues/ifor/chpt4.htm • http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/lessons/des.html • http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct1999/n10141999_9910144.html • http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2000/0207/web-kosovo-report-02-09-00.asp • http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2000/0207/web-kosovo-budget-02-09-00.asp

  5. Program Assumptions • All political arrangements have already been made • Coalition partners have agreed they’re willing to partner with other interested parties • Full disclosure of potential partners even in face of anonymity • All legally binding documents are stored in a safe place • Coalitions are created for mission purposes • Directed at specific goals • Not used for devious purposes - e.g., stealing trade secrets • Specifics are outlined in Joint Vision 2010 and 2020

  6. Combined Interoperability It is not enough just to be joint, when conducting future operations. We must find the most effective methods for integrating and improving interoperability with allied and coalition partners. Although our Armed Forces will maintain decisive unilateral strength, we expect to work in concert with allied and coalition forces in nearly all of our future operations, and increasingly, our procedures, programs, and planning must recognize this reality. John M. Shalikashvili Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Vision 2010

  7. Coalitions of the Future • Characteristics • Number of users - on the order of 10-100 • Dynamics • Creation, Updates, Teardown - on the order of minutes and hours NOT days and weeks • Trust relationships - all kinds (military, commercial) • Participate in multiple coalitions at the same time • Complexity - on the order of 10 at a time • Expected Activities • Communications • Sharing of data • Joint collaboration on specific missions

  8. Goal: Manage dynamic coalition formation and secure sharing of information by authorized members Dynamic CoalitionsProgram Areas • Multi-Dimensional Coalition Policies • Policy representation, negotiation, and discovery • Dynamically alter policy postures across multiple theaters • Secure Group Management • Need scalable security services for large groups (e.g., authentication, key distribution, rekey, group management) • Coalition Infrastructure Services • Existing PKI development ignores coalition requirements • Develop scalable techniques for propagation of revocation information (e.g., compromised keys, expired certs, etc.)

  9. ASIA EUROPE ARABIAN GULF RED SEA ARABIAN SEA AFRICA INDIAN OCEAN U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM)Area of Responsibility (AOR) • 25 countries • 6.43 million square miles • Population: 522+ million • Ethnic groups: 18 • Languages: 7 major, hundreds of dialects • Per capita income: UAE $24,000 ... Ethiopia $530

  10. Research Organizations • Multi-Dimensional Coalition Policies - 8 performers • BBN, NAI Labs, Telcordia, Univ. of Maryland, Univ. of Michigan, Univ. of Pennsylvania , USC/ISI, Veridian-PSR • Secure Group Management - 7 performers • Drexel Univ., Johns Hopkins Univ. , Litton/TASC/Nortel, SRI, Stanford Univ., Telcordia, Xerox PARC • Coalition Infrastructure Services - 6 performers • Johns Hopkins Univ./Brown Univ., MCNC/NCSU, NAI Labs/NCSU, New York Univ./Arizona State Univ., Northeastern Univ., USC-ISI/UC Irvine

More Related