Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt dschmidt@darpa.mil DARPA/ITO

1. Towards Adaptive & Reflective Middleware for Combat SystemsThursday, November 20, 2014 Dr. Douglas C. Schmidt dschmidt@darpa.mil DARPA/ITO Authorized for Public Release: Distribution Unlimited

2. uav.navair.navy.mil/home.htm Emerging Operational Trends & Challenges Key Challenges • Emerging Trends • Next-generation embedded systems are moving from platform-centric to network-centric distributed “systems of systems” • Demands for greater autonomy are growing • To meet expanding needs, our embedded systems must be more assurable, adaptable, & affordable • Devising assurable embedded systems • e.g., efficient, predictable, & safe, secure • Devising adaptable embedded systems • e.g., real-time dynamic allocation of computing/networking resources across many physical/virtual assets • Devising affordable embedded systems • e.g., transition technology to COTS

3. However, recent COTS software technology advances are helping to fundamentally reshape R&D High-performance, real-time, fault-tolerant, and secure systems Middleware, Frameworks, & Components Autonomous distributed embedded systems Patterns & Pattern Languages Power-aware ad hoc, mobile, distributed, & embedded systems Standards & Open-source Emerging R&D Challenges & Trends • Despite IT commoditization, COTS is often not applicable for mission-critical DoD network-centric embedded systems

4. Problems with Current Embedded System Approaches • Likewise, theproprietary multiple technology bases in embedded systems today limit effectiveness by impeding • Assurability (ofQoS), • Adaptability, & • Affordability • Dynamic embedded system QoS requirements historically not supported by COTS • i.e., COTS is too big, slow, buggy, incapable, & inflexible Today, each combat system brings its own: networks computers displays software people Applications Applications • Problems • Non-scalable tactical performance • Inadequate QoS control for joint operations • e.g., distributed weapons control • High software lifecycle costs • e.g., many “accidental complexities” & low-level platform dependencies Sensor Systems Command & Control System Engagement System Weapon Control Systems Weapon Systems EO Kill Eval Sched Illum Network AAW EG TBM EG AAW MG TMB MG AAW AAW AAW AAW Technology base: Proprietary MW Mercury Link16/11/4 Technology base: DII-COE POSIX ATM/Ethernet Technology base: Proprietary MW POSIX NTDS Technology base: Proprietary MW VxWorks FDDI/LANS Technology base: Proprietary MW POSIX VME/1553 Operating System Operating System Wireless/Wireline Networks Endsystem Endsystem

5. Middleware Middleware Sensor System Command & Control System Engagement System Weapon Control System Weapon System Domain-Specific Services Domain-Specific Services Common Services Common Services Distribution Middleware Distribution Middleware Infrastructure Middleware Infrastructure Middleware Operating System Operating System Wireless/Wireline Networks A More Effective Approach Create the new generation of adaptive & reflectivemiddleware system (ARMS) technologies to simultaneously control multiple system QoS properties • Adaptive – capable of static or dynamic modification • Reflective – capable of self-adaptation based on functional & QoS context • QoS – non-functional system properties, e.g., thruput, latency/jitter, scalability, dependability, & security Applications Applications } • ARMS Benefits • Highly scalable tactical performance • e.g., distributed resource mgmt. • Enable new warfighting capability • e.g., distributed weapons control • Support common technology bases • e.g., elevate standardization of COTS to middleware to control software lifecycle costs byminimizing lower-level dependencies } Endsystem Endsystem

6. Applications Domain-Specific Services Common Services Distribution Middleware Infrastructure Middleware Operating Systems & Protocols Hardware DARPA/ITO Family of Embedded Systems Programs • MoBIES • Design technology & software CAD • SEC • Hybrid system control & computation • ARMS • Adaptive & reflective middleware • Quorum • Quality-of-service & translucent layers • PCES • Composable embedded systems • NEST • Deeply networked embedded systems • PCA • Polymorphous computing architecture

7. Recent synergistic advances in fundamentals: Network Why We Can Make a Difference Now • QoS-enabled Middleware • Pluggable protocol/service components & reusable “semi-complete” frameworks that assure end-to-end system qualities Distributed Resource Modeling • Distributed Resource Modeling • Formally specify resource mgmt. plans; model, reason about, & refine them; & monitor/enforce them automatically Pattern Languages QoS-enabled Middleware • Pattern Languages • Generate software architectures by (1) capturing common structures & dynamics & (2) resolving design constraints Recent success infusing standards-based COTS into DRE systems: DRTS Java RT Linux RT CORBA ARMS WSOA Real-time Retargeting hi DRE researchers DRE practitioners Java Linux RT CORBA C++ UNIX CORBA Level of DRE Tactical Technology Abstraction RT Java RT Linux RT CORBA Bold Stroke Avionics Mission Computing C/Ada Cyclic execs Proprietary C++ UNIX CORBA lo ’90-’95 ’96-’01 ’02-’06