Initial Operating Capability Task Force (IOCTF)

1. Initial Operating Capability Task Force (IOCTF) Status Briefing September 21, 2008

2. GEO Executive Committee Established IOCTF • Meeting in July 2008 • Approved Task Force Members • Approved Terms of Reference and Workplan Objectives The IOCTF is convened to report to the GEO Executive Committee in support of GEOSS: • to define and recommend a Concept of Operations plan for the GCI components including aspects of operational requirements, responsibilities, and interaction, • to evaluate the existing GCI components and their sustained operation in light of known and emerging provider and user requirements, reliability, suitability, sustainability, and quality of service, and • to provide administrative recommendations regarding models of GCI operational solutions addressing sustainability, maintenance, enhancements, access control and security, and software licensing and ownership (intellectual property rights). .

3. IOCTF Members ?? Alan Edwards, EC, Co-Chair Ivan DeLoatch, USGS, Co-Chair Gary Foley, USEPA David Halpern Ivan Petiteville, ESA Jay Pearlman, IEEE Alessandro Annoni Ellsworth LeDrew, Co-chair, IEEE Ryosuko Shibasaki Ms Hilcea Ferreira, Alternate Co-Chair, Brazil Mr Gordon Bridge, CBC member, EUMETSAT Mr Stuart Marsh, STC member, United Kingdom Mr Udo Gaertner, Chair, Germany

4. IOCTF Deliverables, July 2008 - June 2009 A Terms of Reference document and workplan were drafted in July 2008 for the IOCTF with the following three progressive deliverables: • Concept of Operations Plan • Evaluation of Existing GCI Components • Recommendations for long-term GCI operations

5. Concept of Operations Plan • High-level common operational design document to include descriptions of the workflow of the GCI, focused on the interaction of GEO service publishers and end-users within GEOSS. • Helps to establish the bounds of the GCI operating environment and to identify and demonstrate operational requirements and constraints. • Oriented to the enterprise perspective rather than the technical point of view and complements the GEOSS Strategic Guidance document • Proposed milestone: draft due September 22, 2008

6. Evaluation of Existing GCI Components • Evaluate identified GCI solutions for Registries, Clearinghouses, and Web Portals with respect to : • the logical design of the Concept of Operations, • documentation from the Architecture Implementation Pilot Phase I, • Interoperability Process Pilot Project (IP3) results, • nominated component information systems and their services, and • user requirements from Communities of Practice and Societal Benefit Areas (SBAs).

7. Evaluation of Existing GCI Components cont. • Evaluation will include aspects of service performance, quality, availability, scalability, sustainability, and suitability. • Collaborates with the ongoing AIP Phase II activity • The deliverable is a structured analysis of performance for each offered GCI solution instance with reference to activity/component(s)’ requirements • The audience will be the architects and implementers of the GCI systems, with an overview suitable for managerial understanding. • Proposed milestone: draft due in March 2009.

8. Recommendations for long-term GCI operations • Potential logistical points for recommendation include: • Long-term cost implications of voluntary, contributed, or contracted operations for each/all components, • Accountability and responsibility for operations by service provider • Issues and alternatives for GCI service operations, maintenance (hardware/software and telecom), and extensibility • Software ownership and intellectual property issues • Operation and maintenance of single versus multiple GCI service instances (e.g. Web portals, Clearinghouses, and Registries) • Access control and security policies on GCI services • User interface policies in support of human and software clients, SBAs, communities of practice, and the general GEO community • Proposed milestone: draft document available April 2009

9. Concept of Operations Document • Purposes are: • to build consensus among user groups, sponsoring or contributing entities, and developers on the requirements, scope, and functionality of the GEOSS Common Infrastructure (GCI) and • to communicate the user’s needs for and expectations of the proposed system to the operators and community. • The primary intended audiences of this document are the users and solutions developers who use the GCI and are responsible for its design and the owners or managers who will need sufficient knowledge to support sustained operations within GEOSS.

10. Concept of Operations Document cont. • Audience: • Owners should read it to understand users’ needs and the developer’s understanding of those needs. • Developers will use this ConOps document as a basis for system development and refinement activities, and to familiarize new team members with the problem domain and scope of the GCI.

11. Document Structure • Context, background • Prior Condition (non-automated environment) • Current Condition (GCI deployment) • Description of all components (registries, Clearinghouse, Web Portal) • Operational Views • Identification of user types • Modes of operation of GCI elements • Operational scenarios of user interaction with CGI • Analysis of GCI – impacts (organizational and operational), improvements, and limitations

12. Operational scenario narratives • Registration of GEO Components and Services • Identification of relevant GEOSS standards • Discovery of resources registered with GEOSS • Identifying best practices • Defining EO user requirements, coverage, and gaps • Process validation or testing of GCI components

13. GCI Operational View

14. GCI operational interaction diagram

15. Next Steps • Evaluate narratives, user types and stated expectations as functional requirements, including embedded performance characteristics (metrics) • Check alignment with Strategic and Tactical Guidance • Develop concluding analysis section to address anticipated organizational and operational impacts of the GCI, anticipated improvements, and limitations or scope of solution

16. Questions ?????