1 / 22

Jacqueline Knudson, DISA PEO-C2C Rick Pearsall, NGA 30 June 2010

Implementing ISO 3166. Jacqueline Knudson, DISA PEO-C2C Rick Pearsall, NGA 30 June 2010. Technical Design for ISO 3166. ISO 3166 Status and History. ISO 3166 has been in usage for sometime FIPS 10-4 withdrawn by NIST on 2 Sep 2008

fox
Télécharger la présentation

Jacqueline Knudson, DISA PEO-C2C Rick Pearsall, NGA 30 June 2010

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. Implementing ISO 3166 Jacqueline Knudson, DISA PEO-C2C Rick Pearsall, NGA 30 June 2010

  2. Technical Design for ISO 3166 Unclassified

  3. ISO 3166 Status and History • ISO 3166 has been in usage for sometime • FIPS 10-4 withdrawn by NIST on 2 Sep 2008 • Initial rationale comes from the National Technology Transfer Act 1995 / (Public Law 104-113) • Announced through the Federal Register • Sunset/Retirement established by the Document and Information Management TWG for 31Dec 2012 • GWG Metadata Focus group contributed • Request to move both FIPS 10-4 and ISO 3166 to the GWG as the primary TWG is in work • ISO 3166 Tri-graphs adopted in IC ISM circa 2003 • ISO 3166 adopted by DDMS circa 2002 • ISO 3166 adopted under Executive Order 13356/13388 – the PM-ISE standards Unclassified

  4. Country Code Tiger Team(How we got here) • GWG established an ad-hoc tiger-team at last fall’s plenary session • FIPS 10-4/ISO 3166 withdrawal and transition briefing by NGA • Realization: Two types of transitions • Standard to standard • Paper to reference engineering artifacts • Therefore citing the ISO 3166 with ‘mappings’ to the legacy FIPS 10-4 codes is necessary, but not sufficient for interoperability or optimizing the related investment strategy A reference implementation that is encoded as a reusable engineering artifact would be a high value/high ROI data asset Unclassified

  5. Country Code Tiger Team(How we got here) • Goal: Model a reference implementation/ common engineering artifact • DOD MWG with IC partners selected Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) as technical method (DOD MWG: 13 Jan 2010) • Test case for SKOS maturation as a DISR/ICSR standard • Produce OWL/RDF • Candidate as a UCORE ‘Common Core’ • Consumed (adopted) by several standards/ specifications/controlled vocabularies such as IC-ISM/ISM.XML, STANAG 1059, re-engineered MIL-STD-2525, etc. Unclassified

  6. Country Code Tiger Team(How we got here) • Goal: Model a reference implementation/ common engineering artifact (con’t) • End-State: A well managed capability • NSG Standards Registry maintenance tools • Populate to DOD MDR • GV-ES Services for implementation • Composable services • Robust semantic model • DOD MDR artifacts for build time implementation and reuse by other XML schema developments • OWL/RDF • SKOS • XML • Feed back to ISO/TC 46 as an informative annex to ISO 3166 Unclassified

  7. Country Code Tiger Team(How we got here) • The technical work is guided by: • Governance process • NISO ‘New Work Item’ in development • Formalizes the relationship between this activity and ISO 3166 • Collaborating across interagency, coalition, and industry partners • Dept of State (DoS), IC, DOD, etc • MoD-UK, MoD-France, Germany, and ACT • Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) and Spatial Ontology Community of Practice (SOCoP) forum • Proposed Data Architecture • Configuration management boundaries of the controlled vocabularies • Relationships between controlled vocabularies • Temporal state Unclassified

  8. Country Code Tiger Team(How we got here) • The technical work is guided by (con’t): • Address stakeholder requirements • Department of State Requirement for ‘Political Recognition’ concept • Started with a ‘profile,’ then ruled it out: • ‘Sub-setting’ creates conflicts with DOD and IC need to keep the codes intact for interchange with allies • Instead, model a political recognition as an attribute • Informal coordination with DoS on 29 Apr 2010, ‘action officer level’ buy-in • Candidate for internationalization, requirement is not unique • Action: Move FIPS 10-4 and ISO 3166 management to the GWG TWG • Requested to take effect on the next DISR cycle – in work Unclassified

  9. ISO 3166 Data Architecture(Political Recognition) ISO 3166 Relationship Country ‘A’ Recognizes Country ‘B’ as “x” or Country ‘A”Does not Recognize Country ‘B’ . . ISO 3166 – Proposed Addition Unclassified

  10. Country Code Tiger Team(How we got here) • Model the governance and the proposed data architecture to guide the technical work (con’t) • Understand governance structure for managing the sovereign nation definitions and the sub-regions • What level of detail is to be part of ISO 3166? • States and territories – Probably OK • Counties, congressional districts, etc. – Probably not OK • Use relationships • Enable relationship between a ‘country’ and other forms of geospatial entities (sub- and super-regions) or socio-political entities • Controlled Vocabularies/Codes can be managed independently from ISO 3166, as can the relationships • Improves agility/flexibility Unclassified

  11. ISO 3166 Data Architecture(Non-ISO 3166 Subdivisions) ISO 3166 - OWL/SKOS Non-ISO 3166 Subdivision Types Relationship Country ‘A’ is subdivided as States/Province, Counties, Postal Code boundaries, Congressional Districts, etc. Candidate for NSG Registry Unclassified

  12. ISO 3166 Data Architecture(ISO 3166 Part 2: Subdivisions) ISO 3166 – Part 2: Country subdivision code (USA Case) Country ‘A’ is subdivided as States, Provinces, etc. Unclassified

  13. ISO 3166 Data Architecture(Non-ISO 3166 Super-Regions) ISO 3166 Non ISO 3166 - Super-Region Definitions Relationship Country ‘A’ is within Continent ‘B’ NSG Registry Candidate:Geospatial Region Names Unclassified

  14. Country Code Tiger Team(How we got here) • Issues Identified currently • ISO 3166 does not have a way to address ‘political recognition’ • Attribute types perhaps should be common and internationalized with individual countries managing their instance information • ISO 3166 does not have a way to address temporal state of the code’s effective dates • Necessary to manage historical analysis • ISO 3166 is not consistently implemented • In some cases, territories are listed at the same level as the sovereign nation that they belong to • Approach should be consistent so that the taxonomical structure can have engineering rigor Unclassified

  15. Implementing ISO 3166 Unclassified

  16. Implementing ISO 3166 • Technical Issue isn’t FIPS 10-4 versus ISO 3166 • Social issue is the time lag to distribute the information that NIST canceled FIPS 10-4 • Minor translations • Issue most often raised is 3-character versus 2-character implementations • Physical changes in applications/data stores is costly if not done in concert with a major block change • Reality, both will exist and have an appropriate context of usage • Internet standard uses 2-character • IC and BTA mandate the usage of 3-character • Sound rationale in both cases Perception that there must be only one syntax - False Unclassified

  17. Implementing ISO 3166 • Migration Strategy: • Mediate at the ‘exposure point’ • Mitigates cost invasive changes • Back-fit into persisted data stores or inside applications only in concert with block upgrades • Others will naturally retire • Apply n-tiered approaches • Apply at the Net-enabled layer, but not in binary formatted military message standard (e.g., Link-16) networks • DCGS calls this the ‘earliest point of exposure’ Unclassified

  18. Implementing ISO 3166 • Precursor: Support NGA/GWG strategy • Enterprise Services and • NSG Registry for standards maintenance • Maintain the code lists • Populate the DOD Metadata Registry • Transition functions to GWG (in work) • Monitor using Data Services Environment/ Enterprise Authoritative Data Source Registry capability • Automate metrics collection • Similar method to what is under consideration for NR-KPP Exposure Verification Availability of Enterprise Service and Standards maintenance – prevents redundant investment and improves native interoperability Unclassified

  19. Exemplars of ISO 3166 Implementations • NECC/Joint C2 Architectural Guidance • ISO 3166 Trigraphs were adopted in 2006 for developmental activities • Rationale was to align with IC ISM • Applicability to all forms of interfaces and data exposure • DCGS-Enterprise and other programs have already initiated this following IC guidance • Any implementation that is asserting ‘native’ conformance to security tagging is using ISO 3166 (Trigraphs) • Migration Strategies for Standards • MIL-STD-2525C moved from FIPS 10-4 digraphs to ISO 3166 digraphs and an interim move until the standard is fully re-engineered (and federated) • DDMS uses ISO 3166 Unclassified

  20. Backup Slides Unclassified

  21. Country Code Ad-Hoc Team POCs • Lead: Rick Pearsall, NGA, GWG ITSA Focus Group Chair, (703) 814-4556, Richard.A.Pearsall@nga.mil • Jeff Bell, NGA, AFSE Focus Group Chair (314) 676-0293, Jeffrey.R.Bell@nga.mil • Jaci Knudson, DISA PEO-C2C, (703) 882-1442, Jacqueline.Knudson@disa.mil • Ray Ford, DISA GE33, (703) 681-2642, Raymond.Ford@disa.mil • Kate Dolan, NSA, kadolan@nsa.gov • Kathleen Rattell, NSA, (443) 479-6642, khratte@nsa.gov UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  22. QUESTIONS? www.disa.mil

More Related