PU512V2 3BUR001401R1 PU512 实时加速器

PU512V2 3BUR001401R1 PU512 实时加速器 

国防部信息环境体系结构（DoD IEA）和网络中心战略
作为过渡序列的统一参考，并指导过渡序列，以确保
根据需要，适当描述了运营/业务能力和IT能力。
国防部首席信息官正在制定一项政策，以描述联邦如何成熟
国防部企业体系结构及其与联邦解决方案体系结构描述的关系。
过渡规划
如上所述，创建和使用体系结构描述的一个主要推动力是
指导新企业、能力和系统的获取和开发，或
对现有系统的改进。DoDAF的早期版本专门解决了这一需求
使用“现状”和“未来”体系结构描述，以及系统和/或服务
技术预测。“现状”和“未来”概念是特定于时间的快照
初作为过渡过程端点的DoDAF视图。然而
过渡战略有几个潜在的陷阱，包括难以准确
代表“原样”起点，其中遗留系统有时很差
文件化，过程基本上未定义。还有一个考虑是，长期目标往往非常灵活，导致“未来”版本的变化。
因为“现状”和“未来”体系结构描述是类似的时间特定版本
具有相似视角的数据集，过渡规划能够绘制演化路径
从“现状”到其相应的“未来”建筑愿景
通过未来（可能）了解预期结果或目标
未定义）未来点。预计未来的体系结构描述将发生变化
随着时间的推移，部门优先事项发生变化和重新调整。
国防部体系结构管理的联邦方法
国防部对分布式体系结构数据采用了联合方法
18
DoDAF体系结构开发-6步流程
http://cio-nii.defense.gov/sites/dodaf20/arch_development.html[2011年3月3日下午3:33:54]
服务、机构和COI之间的收集、组织和管理
利用虚拟而非物理数据开发国防部企业体系结构的方法
通过支持文档和架构视图描述的集合。这种方法
提供更大的灵活性，同时保留重要的监督和质量管理
部门一级的服务。关于国防部联邦方法的详细指南将包括：
包含在DoDD 8210“国防部企业架构”中
分级问责
分层问责（TA）是将权力和责任分配给国防部
国防部企业体系结构要素的组织。根据TA，国防部正在定义和构建
企业范围的能力，包括数据标准、业务规则、使能系统，
以及企业部门、特定部门的相关接口层
（例如，JCA、国防部组件）和程序解决方案。每一层都有具体的目标，如
以及对他们之上或之下的层的责任。
体系结构描述在开发时进行分类，以便于对齐（映射
和链接）、编目、导航和搜索
国防部财产登记处。各层开发的所有体系结构描述应：
联合，如国防部联合战略所述。
为了使国防部企业体系结构能够被发现、共享和
可互操作。体系结构描述还可以支持层中的许多目标，每个目标
其中可能包含对结构、内容或详细程度的具体要求。对齐
决策应平衡体系结构描述的相互依赖性和以下需求：
解决当地问题的当地灵活性。对齐描述了小

PU512V2 3BUR001401R1 PU512 实时加速器 

PU512V2 3BUR001401R1 PU512 实时加速器 

that the DoD Information Environment Architecture (DoD IEA) and the Net-Centric strategies
act as uniform references for, and guide the transition sequence to ensure that both
operational/business capabilities and IT capabilities, as required, are properly described.
Policy is being developed by the DoD CIO to describe how federation will be used to mature
the DoD EA as well as its relationship to federated, solution Architectural Descriptions.
Transition Planning
As discussed above, one major impetus for creating and using Architectural Descriptions is to
guide acquisition and development of new enterprises, capabilities and systems or
improvements to existing ones. Earlier versions of DoDAF addressed this need exclusively
using “As-Is” and “To-Be” Architectural Descriptions, along with a Systems and/or Services
Technology Forecast. The “As-Is” and “To-Be” concepts are time-specific snapshots of
DoDAF views that initially served as the endpoints of a transition process. However, this
transition strategy has several potential pitfalls, to include the difficulty in accurately
representing the “As-Is” starting point where legacy systems are sometimes poorly
documented, and processes are largely undefined. There is also the consideration that longterm goals are often very flexible, resulting in flux in the “To-Be” version.
Since the “As-Is” and “To-Be” Architectural Descriptions are time-specific versions of similar
sets of data with similar viewpoints, transition planning is able to chart an evolutionary path
from the “As-Is” to its corresponding “To-Be” architectural vision given a clear
understanding of the expected outcomes or objectives through some future (perhaps
undefined) future point. It is expected that the To-Be Architectural Descriptions will change
over time as Departmental priorities shift and realign.
Federated Approach to DoD Architecture Management
The Department has adopted a federated approach to distributed architectural data
18
DoDAF Architecture Development - 6 Step Process
http://cio-nii.defense.gov/sites/dodaf20/arch_development.html[3/3/2011 3:33:54 PM]
collection, organization, and management among the Services, Agencies and COIs as its
means of developing the DoD Enterprise Architecture, with a virtual rather than physical data
set described through supporting documentation and architectural views. This approach
provides increased flexibility while retaining significant oversight and quality management
services at the Departmental level. Detailed guidance on the DoD federation approach will be
contained in DoDD 8210, “Architecting the DoD Enterprise.”
Tiered Accountability
Tiered Accountability (TA) is the distribution of authority and responsibility to a DoD
organization for an element of the DoD EA. Under TA, DoD is defining and building
enterprise-wide capabilities that include data standards, business rules, enabling systems,
and an associated layer of interfaces for Department, specified segments of the enterprise
(e.g., JCA, DoD Components), and Programmatic solutions. Each tier has specific goals, as
well as responsibilities to the tiers above or below them.
Architectural Descriptions are categorized when developed to facilitate alignment (mapping
and linking), cataloging, navigating, and searching disparate architecture information in a
DoD registry of holdings. All Architectural Descriptions developed by the tiers should be
federated, as described in the DoD Federation Strategy.
Alignment in the tiers is required for the DoD EA to be discoverable, shareable, and
interoperable. Architectural Descriptions can also support many goals within the tiers, each
of which may imply specific requirements for structure, content, or level of detail. Alignment
decisions should balance the interdependence of Architectural Descriptions with the need for
local flexibility to address local issues. Alignment describes the min