|
Shipboard Software Deployment Tools for Complex Heterogeneous Systems
Navy SBIR 2013.1 - Topic N131-038 NAVSEA - Mr. Dean Putnam - [email protected] Opens: December 17, 2012 - Closes: January 16, 2013 N131-038 TITLE: Shipboard Software Deployment Tools for Complex Heterogeneous Systems TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Information Systems ACQUISITION PROGRAM: PEO-IWS-5A Advanced Systems and Technology Office. RESTRICTION ON PERFORMANCE BY FOREIGN CITIZENS (i.e., those holding non-U.S. Passports): This topic is "ITAR Restricted". The information and materials provided pursuant to or resulting from this topic are restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120 - 130, which control the export of defense-related material and services, including the export of sensitive technical data. Foreign Citizens may perform work under an award resulting from this topic only if they hold the "Permanent Resident Card", or are designated as "Protected Individuals" as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3). If a proposal for this topic contains participation by a foreign citizen who is not in one of the above two categories, the proposal will be rejected. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to develop automation tools and techniques for software deployment and installation on complex heterogeneous systems, which improve reliability of network configuration and system interfaces, and decrease system down time. DESCRIPTION: Navy Combat Systems are complex, network-based collections of heterogeneous software components from multiple vendors. The complexity and heterogeneous nature of these systems make initial software deployment time consuming and error prone. Worse, shipboard personnel are frequently required to redeploy software after the initial Installation and Checkout (INCO) due to hardware or system failures and in the event of system attack or corruption. Current software installation tools and processes do not adequately address the environment of the complex systems. They often address a partial ability to make the needed installation, leaving the rest of the installation to manual processes and procedures. Current components include executables, firmware, or data in various forms such as databases, flat files, or configuration files. The components are often hardware specific or dependent. The number of discreet steps a sailor must accurately perform to properly redeploy system software is overwhelming, often resulting in a flawed installation and reduced system performance. Technological concepts, products, methods, and techniques are needed to develop procedures that allow shipboard operators to consistently and successfully perform complex heterogeneous system software installations of an Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) system in remote situations. The technology sought will support the operators of the AN/SQQ89A (V)15 sonar system. The technology will involve interaction between LINUX, Solaris, and Fedora Core software. The installations have to be accomplished without the aid of highly trained system experts (Ref. 2). A person-to-machine interface that supports operator problem-solving and decision-making situations, without requiring detailed knowledge of underlying software components, network architecture or system interfaces is needed. Meeting this need will provide improved performance and capability. Software deployment can be categorized by six activities: Release, Install, Activate, Deactivate, Update and Adapt (Ref. 1). This topic solicits innovation for the Install, Activate, and Deactivate activities. Install activity covers the transfer from producer to consumer and the installation at the consumer site. Activate and Deactivate cover initialization and shutdown of the software, respectively. Current processes and tools for streamlined software installation and deployment concentrate on deploying software systems from commercial vendors to commercial customers. Most of the technologies concentrate on medium to large size commercial organizations deploying software across wide area networks (WANs) or via remote deployments such as cloud computing. These processes and tools are not designed with specific combat system concerns and obstacles in mind. They require a high level of system administration expertise and dedicated system administration resources (Ref 3). Shipboard combat systems present a unique complicated challenge to system and software deployment. They are on mobile, sea going, combat vessels that have to meet the safeguards and restrictions imposed by Security and Information Assurance requirements. Additionally, ample storage is not available for spare resources, redundant components, backup systems, or alternative processing facilities. More importantly, shipboard combat system operators do not have the same level of training and experience, nor do they have expert support personnel available (Ref 4). Fleet support agencies or contractors are generally responsible for the Release, Update, Adapt, and initial Install activities. In cases of system failure, shipboard personnel, have to perform the Install activity. Of these, install is the most complex of the software deployment activities and must be accomplished without the training, experience, or support that is available to commercial organizations. The proposed processes and tools would have to automate the Install activity for an ASW system and facilitate the system software redeployment without the need for detailed knowledge of system software components, operating systems, network architectures, or system interfaces. This tool will provide the Navy with the needed improved performance and capability. The Phase I effort does not require access to classified information. Data of the same level of complexity as secured data will be provided to support Phase I work. The Phase II effort will likely require secure access, and the contractor will need to be prepared for personnel and facility certifications for handling classified data. PHASE I: The company will develop concepts for Shipboard Software Deployment Tools that meet the requirements described above The company will demonstrate the feasibility of the concepts in meeting Navy needs and will establish that the concepts can be feasibly developed into a useful product for the Navy. Feasibility will be established by analysis of their design approach. The small business will provide a Phase II development plan with performance goals and key technical milestones, and that will address technical risk reduction. PHASE II: Based on the results of Phase I and the Phase II development plan, the small business will develop a prototype that can install a representative fragment of a full Anti-Submarine Warfare system for evaluation as appropriate. The prototype will be evaluated to determine its capability to meet the performance goals defined in the Phase II development plan and the Navy requirements for Shipboard Software Deployment Tools. System performance will be demonstrated through prototype evaluation, modeling, or analysis over the required range of parameters including numerous deployment cycles. Evaluation results will be used to refine the prototype into an initial design that will meet Navy requirements. The company will prepare a Phase III development plan to transition the technology to Navy use. PHASE III: If Phase II is successful, the company will be expected to support the Navy in transitioning the tool for Navy use. The company will develop Shipboard Software Deployment Tools for evaluation to determine its effectiveness in an operationally relevant environment. The company will support the Navy for test and validation to certify and qualify the system for Navy use. PRIVATE SECTOR COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL/DUAL-USE APPLICATIONS: This technology could be used by any industry that deploys software. Current state of the art for commercial systems is to deploy renditions of operating systems across multiple computing hardware platforms. They have multiple operating systems and multiple hardware systems that must have configurations that meet stringent corporate standards for protecting their businesses and their proprietary information. The use of this tool would reduce the time involved and the needed expertise to oversee deployment of their computing environments. REFERENCES: 2. Roth, Emilie M.; Mumaw, Randall J., Using Cognitive Task Analysis to Define Human Interface Requirements for First-Of-A-Kind Systems, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, General Sessions, pp. 520-524(5) 3. Knudson, Arve. "Generic Software Distribution and Deployment: Streamlining Software Distribution and Deployment Tasks With PyPkg." ACM Digital Library. VDM Verlag. 5/1/2012. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1643668 4. Parobek,Lubos. "Taking the Leg-Work out of Systems Provisioning: Best Practices for Reducing Deployment Costs". 5/1/2012. http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/html/itp/kace_Taking_the_Leg_Work_out_of_Systems_Provisioning_Best_Practices_for_Reducing_Deployment_Costs.pdf KEYWORDS: System Interfaces, software installation and deployment, software deployment activities, shipboard combat systems, system software redeployment, redeploy software
|