August 2015


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mark Pullen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SAC-PDG-PSG-C2SIM <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 11 Aug 2015 23:26:34 -0400
text/plain (69 lines)
Last month I asked the international members of SISO C2SIM who had attended the Prague meeting to comment on the possibility that C2SIM might adopt aspects of the US NIEM. Received responses from Rachid and Lionel; forwarding these as we discussed in the monthly teleconference last week. Further comments by all members welcome; perspectives of other international (non-US) members could be particularly valuable; please reply to this email. Kevin Galvin will present status and lead discussion on this topic at the C2SIM meeting 3 Sep, to be held at SIW Orlando and also online.


Hi Mark,

As described in Slide 6, NIEM should be a kind of "higher/upper Model" for rules and LDM Messages (Rules are in my point of view not really a problem as far as there is no duplicity). Which means that LDM messages must be adapted to reach a NIEM compliance: In case that some changes occur in NIEM, that will lead to a change in the LDM messages and rules "iterative engineering". Question: Who will be responsible for doing this?? As I know it is difficult enough to get a standard introduced. Much more difficult is to get it updated.

A considerable supplementary effort is required for non-US Participants to deal with US-Policy. This can extremely limit the agility of the C2SIM LDM for other nations.
Changes in NIEM (also for domain specific sub models) are in the US hand. I don't have enough expertise in NIEM, but I think there is for each domain a responsible subgroup "data stewards" of SMEs; other nations have to harmonize with. That means that C2SIM-SMEs should be part of the NIEM-SME groups. That will probably not be desirable (in US point of view for non US). And national non US-budget should be used to finance US Data model in case of changes/extensions, etc. I wonder, if other nations will be willing to support this. The NIEM itself is arbitrary extensible, so that I personally don't see a data model problem. I am not so worry that the LDM "through NIEM" will be US dependent.

Furthermore, I guess that NIEM is complex. Like in MIP,  man leaved the JC3IEDM because of complexity and limited the use on MIM. I am afraid to have the same result here too. I have no problem if additional benefits can be reached by using NIEM for non US-C2SIM community. But I don't see that. As I can in Slide 6, there will be a huge effort for NIEM conformity, which is just because of US-policy/requirement. Question: Why should other nations support this, knowing that they have no influence on NIEM??

Best regards


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: KHIMECHE Lionel [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Gesendet: Freitag, 17. Juli 2015 12:51
An: J Mark Pullen; [log in to unmask]; El Abdouni Khayari Rachid Dr.
Cc: Mark Pullen; GALVIN Kevin; Kevin Gupton
Betreff: RE: would like to have your opinion

Hi Mark,

Thanks a lot for keeping me in the loop regarding this key concern.

First of all, I understand that the "Map message structures to NIEM" on slide 6 deals with the C2SIM-Initialize and C2SIM-TaskingReporting activities. In other word, the NIEM approach doesn't impact the C2SIM LDM definition.

The stumbling block for the international community to adopt the standard if message structures are mapped with NIEM is the strong adherence with Sparx EA Corporate edition that seems mandatory to use in order to comply with NIEM rules and to generate NIEM conformant XML schemas. No international C2 systems are compliant with NIEM XML schema.

Hence, it may be useful that the C2SIM standard proposed an another option to generate XML schema in addition to NIEM approach that is useful for US only. I will recommend to liaise with the MIM team at FKIE. Some works were done in order to generate MIM schemas. I do not think that such works were approved by MIP. Nevertheless, that's the only international activity were most of the NATO Nations meet for C2 interoperability. FKIE could be interested also if MIM rules and schema could be adopted by SISO.

All the best,


Manager Etudes Technico-Opérationnelles
« Simulation pour l’appui aux opérations et la préparation des forces » Tél. : +33 (0)1 79 86 45 46 Fax : +33 (0)1 79 86 40 24 PNIA : 821 947 45 46

-----Message d'origine-----
De : J Mark Pullen [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Envoyé : mardi 14 juillet 2015 23:14 À : KHIMECHE Lionel ICT; [log in to unmask]; El Abdouni Khayari Rachid Dr.
Cc : Mark Pullen; GALVIN Kevin; Kevin Gupton Objet : would like to have your opinion

Lionel, Laurent, Rachid,

A topic came up at the C2SIM monthly teleconference today that could benefit from your perspective.

Kevin Gupton, who leads the C2SIM Logical Data Model (LDM) development effort, presented current state of LDM work, using the attached slides.

Slides 3 to 8, with details in slide 6, show using some aspects of the US government National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) as an explicit part of C2SIM.

This would be effective for US purposes, since it is clear that C2SIM will need to be able to exchange information with NIEM to conform with US government policy. Also it could be attractive from a SISO basis since SISO is adopting many of the NIEM XML rules. However there is some concern that it might make C2SIM seem too US-centric and therefore hamper adoption.

I told the participants in today's teleconference I would ask the three of you, as international C2SIM insiders, to give us your perspective as to the probable impact on C2SIM's international use if NIEM rules are included in the standard, either by duplicating them or by reference.

I'd appreciate receiving your response to this by 3 Aug 2015,  as input to out next teleconference which is on 4 Aug 2015.