Nameless Arte

An Interview with a man from the dark side

2013-07-21T06:38:00.001-07:00

I guarantee this interview is the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me Odhin .It happened on June 22,2013 The man calls himself the Baron. He is the host of many meetup.org groups in Montreal.
There were two of us, the Baron and I
The report:
The following is not all stated in sequence.
We talked in what role I would have in his company paranormal company.
Next I grilled him on his character.
I find him illusive. He is very rich. Apparently he owned an international aerospace company and sold it.
I asked him why he did that & he stated to much stress ...
He has several degrees. They are history, computer science and software engineering. Software engineering is a degree ? I never knew that.
Computer Engr. is a degree.
He was in the Gulf war. I asked his rank and he would not tell me. I asked what's the big deal. He stated it was classified. He stated he signed agreements with the government not to mention it to anybody what he did. I surmise he was in the Intel. sector of the Armed Forces. I asked him if he killed people. He stated," yup and gets easier " I asked him about Edward Snowdon and he stated he should be shot. I told him he was a hero. He disagreed.
He stated their was intelligence and oversite intelligence.
He stated," their are many people that agree with him." I am sure their are. I mentioned you work for criminals ,spill the beans :P
After the war, he became a Tibetan Buddhist. I asked which temple. He wouldn't even tell me that. I mentioned, "What is the big deal ?"
I told him I used to belong to the Tibetan Buddhist Temple in Verdun Montreal. I told him I quit my teacher refused to help me. I gave him the history Chinese acquisition of Tibetan.
Given his military background I asked why not hang around with your war buddies. He stated, "Who want to hang around with a bunch of 40 year olds .
I asked him, ": why start these groups ?" He stated, " It keeps him amused
At one point I asked him about Carolyn Rosin and deweaponisation of space.
He told me the weaponisation of space is already in progress.
I showed him this You tube.
HTTPS://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ALLUuvsVkM
"Oh yeah, the Disclosure Project" and gigled .
I told him what Ms Rosin stated what was in the video before showing it to him. He mentioned Werner
von Braun.
I told him Carolin Rosin was his friend.
I asked for proof of weaponisation of space and he mentioned www.bigelowaerospace.com He showed a separate page with an grey alien on it and it read below ET' spacecraft are a hazard to human aircraft.
I stated, well if you get close enough to them, yah (the field the ET's craft emit might disable or screw up electrical systems of our aircraft), but the Americans are bunch of paranoid fuckers."
The Baron giggled and stated yeh. The Baron told me that Bigelow Aerospace signed agreements with the US congress to weaponise space. I asked him what type of stuff is up there. He mentioned orbiting nukes. They were their since the 1990 and some other stuff. He told me the nukes weren't pointed at anyone.(Where is an asteroid the size of Texas when you need it ? :>)
The Baron runs several interesting groups: robotics,fringe science and alternative energy et alia
Apparent on occasion dangerous people do join.
He told me about one. I actually met that person. Some one came to meeting and claimed
he invented a time machine ! It was discombobulated clock ,lol .He was looking for funding.
The Baron stated to me , he is the way he cause of certain individuals that show up, bipolar ,manic depressives etc...
He told me if he gave his rank away I could find out what he did and he laughed nervously.....
I tried to guess his rank it is a Captain and above ,but below a General because of education.
He says he is not paranoid but told why do you think we meet in the open with many surveyaillance cameras everyhwhere ?
In the end we just babbled on about movies and crap
[ We do share some viewpoints. He is scientifically very knowleable. In other areas he is completely out to lunch]
[The second interview took place at July 20 in the Ghosts and Paranormal and Ufo group The following is summary of what took place. Questions are not in order that happened and as best as I can remember them]
He was speaking to some one else. He started talking about astral projection about 20 minutes into meeting
Baron: Wikipedia cannot be trusted because you do know who the sources are. We will go straight to the sources and check The internet is b.s
[I agree]
ME: So you can astral project ?
Baron: Yup I can.
Me: Cool. I mentioned an experience of mine where I was able to view myself simultaneously externally and internally.
He made some mention that I have two conscoiuses in me.
ME: I made some remark that the mind is not local. It is not connected to brain..
Baron: Mind is not connected to the brain
Baron: Dreaming in color is the first step to astral projection. Most people dream in black and white
The Baron mentioned he studied Buddhism for several months to help with PTSD.
ME: Which Tibetan Buddhist temple
Baron: I doubt if you have heard it, it was Dharmasala ? where the Dalai llama resides. I was persistent at the practise and succeed, many people don’t necessarily succeed.
You can either did what I did or spend years in psychotherapy.
Baron: There are many Tibetan Buddhist temples that teach what I learnt .
[ I went and checked. There are no Tibetan temples that teach specialized PTSD training for vets. Buddhist training can help. Teachers start you off with Shamata ,Vipsyana and Voidness meditation. This is in all 4 schools. There is also 100,000 mandala offerings,long prostrations,guru puja and long Vajrasattva practice. These last 3 practises take easily 3 or more months done daily. Of course, there is breath meditation which is the easiest.Ask anyone who has done 100,000 long prostrations. They will tell you their body aches like hell after the first week. Once the basics are mastered,you can then get tantra. In order TO DO tantra correctly,you need to turn on the superconscious mind at will, you need compassion,voidness and the ability to manifest thought form at will. . I met only 2 people who can do this. Most people including I just recited it, which is NOT practising it. If you think this is practise you are DELUDING yourself.]
Baron talked about the pyramids and how much older than we thought they were..
He mentioned a curious oddity about a steel nail embedded in wood found in Afganistan.
The nail in the wood was ancient and humans at that time did not know how to make them.
We talked about similar stuff.
I made some mention about the New Testament and existence of Jesus
Baron: Jesus never existed. You mean story written about him 150 years after he died.
ME: Yes I found 3 facts on a site that corroborates his existence. [ I am no Xtian apologist] I told him I was looking for the opposite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus
Baron: Religions have one purpose and that is to control fellow humans.
Me: Humans created religion.
At some point he was talking about ghosts and how humans are like light houses and entities can be aware of us when we are in certain states of mind.
ME: I mentioned a story of Inuit lady friend of mine who went home to visit her relatives. In the room she was sleeping, she saw her dead brother lay next to her. He was shot. She ran screaming out of the room saying she aint gonna sleep there anymore.
The Baron didn’t seem to interested in the account and was more interested in the other person.
He then mentioned Shamanic Witchcraft and its background as it existed as a distinct field. I got somewhat annoyed because I smelled a flaw.
ME: Using those terms together sound redundant and does it exist ?
Baron: Yes it exists . Stop bugging me.
ME: I mentioned that Shamanic Witchcraft seemed to be another name for Trad. Craft.
Baron: please stop…..[he was getting really annoyed]
I apologised that I doubt him to the term after checking. I made mention that to be a shaman you had to had a death like experience.
Baron: He told me you atleast know something. He said he was tired of me picking him apart.
ME: You don’t like me being critical ?
Baron: I don’t mind. Please leave the group.
ME: I did not like being treated like an idiot and left.

Follow up:
I asked around to people much more knowledgeable than I in the the field of shamanism and Trad Craft from my sources facebook page
“X”: wrote: "Larry, the term "shamanic" is a very modern word. Very modern. It is used largely by Anthropologists (and even these days, not by many) to refer to a certain kind of spiritual worker of first-nations and Primal peoples worldwide, who do healings and séances and divinations and the like on behalf of a community of others. The term "shaman" is a culturally derived and culturally specific term, from one group of people in Siberia, and refers to their particular power-workers, but the name and term has been "universalized" by academics, particularly decades back, but not so much now. There is, therefore, no old tradition of witchcraft that would ever have been called "shamanic". A person may describe some activities of witches as "shamanic", and by that, they would mean that the witches used trances, communicated with spirits, tried to obtain helpers/familiars, powers, and outcomes from the Unseen. But that's all it can mean. Any tradition of craft or spirit-work outside of the realm of Witchcraft can be described as "shamanic". But no one "back in the day" would have called what they were doing "shamanic". Even the people who gave us the term "shaman" wouldn't use a term like "shamanic". That's a modern academic descriptor."
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Follow Up:
For Tantra:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra_techniques_%28Vajrayana%29
In my comments about Tantra, I am referring to Deity Yoga.

Net-Ops :Another Supposedly leaked document

2013-06-10T09:29:00.001-07:00

This is another docment from http://thedocs.hostzi.com The document is faithfully produced expept for graphic files.
Have fun with it :)

Purpose

The purpose of the NetOps Strategic Vision is to communicate the DoD CIO’s vision and goals for migrating to new NetOps capabilities which will enable the Department’s Net-Centric vision. It builds on the DoD Information Management/Information Technology (IM/IT) Strategic Plan, the GIG Architectural Vision, and supporting Net-Centric strategies. This document is intended to do the following: guide the Department’s NetOps activities, initiatives, and investments; foster unity of effort throughout DoD and its mission partners; serve as a framework for governing the evolution of NetOps capabilities; and provide the foundation for planning the coherent implementation of NetOps across the DoD.

The NetOps Strategic Vision is written for Department leadership including the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Combatant Commands, and Agencies. It provides insight for the Department’s mission partners and other organizations engaged inthe operation and defense of the GIG. Commanders, warfighters, system and service developers, and acquisition personnel must understand the vision for NetOps. Areas of responsibility for this new construct have been defined in Departmental policy and guidance such as the Defense Information Enterprise Architecture version 1.0 and will be fomalized in the DoD Instruction, NetOps for the GIG

Introduction

2.1

NetOps Overview

As the globally interconnected set of DoD information capabilities, the GIG is truly a set of Joint capabilities that are used throughout DoD. The information and functional capabilities it provides impact every aspect of DoD operations. The GIG includes all owned and leased communications and computing systems and services, software (including applications), data, security services, and other associated services necessary to achieve Information Superiority. It also includes National Security Systems as defined in section 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. The GIG supports all Department of Defense, National Security, and related Intelligence Community missions and functions (strategic, operational, tactical, and business), in war and in peace.

The GIG provides capabilities from all operating locations (bases, posts, camps, stations, facilities, mobile platforms, and deployed sites). The GIG provides interfaces to coalition, allied, and non-DoD users and systems.

NetOps is defined as the DoD-wide operational,organizational, and technical capabilities for operating and defending the GIG. NetOps includes, but is not limited to, enterprise management, net assurance

, and content management. NetOps provides commanders with GIG situational awareness to make informed command and control decisions. GIG situational awareness is gained through the operational and technical integration of enterprise

DoD Directive 8100.1, September 19, 2002

This term formerly referred to as “Net Defense” DoD NetOps Strategic Vision

management and defense actions and activities across all levels of command (strategic, operational, and tactical).

•

Enterprise Management is the set of functional capabilities and operational processes necessary to monitor, manage, and control the availability, allocation, and performance within and across the GIG. It includes Enterprise Services Management, Applications Management, Computing Infrastructure Management, Network Management, Satellite Communications Management, and Electromagnetic Spectrum Management.

•

Net Assurance is the set of functional capabilities and operational processes necessary to protect and defend the GIG. This includes the operational responsibilities for

information assurance, computer network defense (to include Computer Network Defense Response Actions), and critical infrastructure protection in defense of the GIG.

•

Content Management is the set of functional capabilities and operational processes necessary to manage, and facilitate the visibility and accessibility of information within

and across the GIG. NetOps influences all core segments of the GIG and associated capabilities in the Net-Centric capability portfolio

which encompasses Net Management as well as those associated with Information Transport, Enterprise Services and Information Assurance. By linking these operational, technical and programmatic perspectives to achie ve integrated capabilities, NetOps assures the availability, protection and integrity of DoD networks, systems, services, and information. In support of NetOps, the United States Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) is responsible for planning, integrating, and coordinating DoD’s global network operations by directing GIG operations and defense and by advocating the respective desired characteristics and capabilities. USSTRATCOM executes this mission through the Joint Task Force–Global Network Operations (JTF-GNO) with the full and active participation by the entire joint community. Every DoD Component and partner organization that develops, deploys, operates, or uses any portion of the GIG plays a role in the accomplishment of this mission from the Combatant Commands and Services through acquisition executivesand materiel developers who must ensure capabilities destined for use as part of the GIG are supportive of NetOps and USSTRATCOM’s role.

2.2

The Role of NetOps in Net-Centric Operations The role of NetOps in Net-Centric Operations is to enable the GIG to provide users at all levels and in all operational environments access to and use of the information they need. As depicted in Figure 1, NetOps is a critical operational enabler, and forms the core of GIG operations in a Net-Centric framework. NetOps enables the operations and defense within and across GIG information transport, enterprise services, and information assurance capabilities.

DoD Instruction, NetOps for the GIG, Draft Final, July 2008

Net-Centric Joint Capability Area (JCA) Tier 2 DoD NetOps Strategic Vision

It does so in a way that creates a trusted environment capable of protecting and maintaining the integrity, quality, and availability of information. This trusted environment enables users to post, access, and share relevant information and to collaborate on the development and/or use of such information. This environment also enables forces to conduct Net-Centric Operations and superior decision making through shared understanding, and agile force synchronization.

Figure 1.

NetOps Enabled Net-Centric Operations

2.3

NetOps Today

NetOps has yet to transcend the organizational and functional stovepipes of individual GIG networks in terms of interoperability and information access. While each of these stovepipes has its own management capability, DoD does not yet share information to manage across domains. The result is relatively static configurations that limit NetOps and GIG agility in the face of rapidly changing and Providing a robust, DoD-wide NetOps capability would significantly enhance the ability of the operators/defenders of the GIG to fully support warfighting and non-warfighting missions in an increasingly joint and multi-partner environment.

DoD NetOps Strategic Vision

unanticipated mission needs. The Joint NetOps Concept of Operations

has enabled the DoD to begin significantly improving how the GIG is operated and defended. Also the Net-Centric Functional Capability Board within the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) process and the related Net-Centric Capability Portfolio Manager (NC CPM) initiative

have begun to address many of the key deficiencies that have been reported from operation Iraqi Freedom and day-to-day operations. Continued organizational, technological

and process changes will enable a significantly more unified, timely and responsive GIG NetOps that can fully enable net-centric operations by providing:

•

Timely and complete GIG Situational Awareness information to Commanders

•

GIG Command and Control capabilities that enable rapid decision making

•

Clear, well integrated and enforceable NetOps operational policies

•

More effective, coordinated operational use of the electromagnetic spectrum

•

Standardized metrics that enable the measurement of the health and mission readiness across the GIG

•

Automated, federated NetOps capabilities that enable the rapid adaption of GIG capabilities to rapidly changing mission needs and unanticipated threats.

•

Increased coordination, alignment and synchronization of NetOps acquisition and fielding activities currently under way.Addressing these capabilities will significantly improve the ability of the operators and defenders of the GIG to fully support ongoing warfighting and peacekeeping missions in an increasingly joint and multi-partner environment.However, there is a need for overarching operationally based guidance to ensure unity of effort in transforming NetOps to this end

NetOps in the Future

3.1

The NetOps Challenge To provide the capabilities outlined in the previous section, NetOps will transform along with the GIG, to dynamically support new warfighting, intelligence,and business processes and enable users to access and share trusted information in a timely manner. The future GIG will result in a richer Net-Centric information environment comprised of shared services and capabilities based on advanced technologies. It will be heavily reliant on end-to-end virtual networks to interconnect anyone, anywhere, at

Joint Concept of Operations for GIG NetOps, Version3, 4 August 2006

Network Management & Spectrum Management Functional Solutions Analysis (NM & SP FSA); Final Draft,

16 May 2008

The overarching NetOps challenge is to be able to operate and defend the GIG as a single, unified, agile and adaptive enterprise capable of providing

responsive and resilient support to multiple simultaneous mission areas under uncertain and changing conditions. DoD NetOps Strategic Vision

any time with any type of information through voice,video, images, or text. It will also be faced with even greater security threats that NetOps must help address.

In a Net-Centric environment, the core GIG capabilities (e.g. Information transport, Enterprise Services, and Information Assurance) and the applications they support will become increasingly dynamic with new capabilities being deployed, configured, re-configured, and removed as needed to meet the needs of anagile force and dynamic mission requirements. This new and dynamic environment will require that NetOps be executed in an equally dynamic way. As the current Base Realignment and Closure progresses, Commanders and staff elements will find themselves increasingly operating in an environment that they do not directly control. For example, an Air Force or Army unit may be Joint-based on each other’sinstallation, which will require them to use the host organization’s networked infrastructure and conform to the host’s policies. Another example would be if a user at a Navy or Marine Corps installation had to access Army services, information, or data to do operational planning. While there are some notable exceptions, this is in sharp contrast to today’s environment, in which most services and capabilities are Service stovepipes

owned and controlled by individual units or organizations. In a shared environment, warfighters will have to trust that services and capabilities will be available when and where they are needed. NetOps requires dynamic, flexible, integrated management capabilities that enable rapid synchronization of decisions at appropriate levels across different areas of responsibility or domains within the GIG. This will facilitate the decision-making necessary to quickly identify problems, shift resources, change configurations and coordinate management of the GIG infrastructure and capabilities. Finally, the future NetOps must provide Commanders with the ability to effectively control, manage, defend, and operate in and through the cyberspace domain. The National Military Strategy for Cyberspace Operations lays the initial groundwork for this effort and NetOps must continue to evolve and support this integral component of future warfighting.

3.2

The Vision for Net-Centric NetOps

To meet the NetOps challenge, a fundamentally improved approach for performing NetOps is necessary – one that involves major improvements in the ability to achieve GIG shared situational awareness and significant changes in the overarching approach to C2 of the GIG as well as the enabling capabilities; the way these capabilities are provided across DoD, and most importantly the way they are viewed and employed by the GIG’s users. The vision is to transform existing and new NetOps capabilities into a force multiplier that enables the warfighters, business, and intelligence users and decision makers to fully employ the The NetOps Vision is to transform existing and new NetOps capabilities into a force multiplier that enables warfighter, business, intelligence, and enterprise information environment users and decision makers to fully employ the power of the GIG. DoD NetOps Strategic Vision

power of the GIG. This vision will be attained by establishing NetOps capabilities that are: Mission Oriented: All information dependent processes necessary for a mission can be effectively supported; User Focused: Users can access and obtain needed information from anywhere in the GIG in a timely manner; even when their needs are unanticipated;

Globally Agile: Rapidly changing and unanticipated mission priorities and requirements can be met by dynamically maneuvering GIG resources; and Institutionally Transformed: NetOps capabilities evolve smoothly in concert with GIG capabilities and emerging Net-Centric operational concepts.

This vision will require developing and implementing agile and responsive planning, engineering and provisioning capabilities. In this vision, GIG situational awareness information will be shared with GIG authorized users so they can collaborate on meeting mission needs or assessing the impact of GIG changes on mission accomplishment. NetOps personnel will use shared situational awareness to proactively manage the GIG to meet commander’s intent and to rapidly respond to unexpected changes in threats and mission needs. Shared situational awareness will facilitate central oversight of critical GIG assets and rapid integrated management and execution of decisions. This will be accomplished through

decentralized policy-based management with a high degree of automated support and by employing consistent tactics, techniques, and procedures that enable the conduct of coherent operations in a federated GIG environment. In the future, NetOps will be able to routinely, rapidly, and accurately reallocate or reconfigure GIG resources, including elements such asinformation assurance devices, computing processing and storage capacities, and network throughputs tomeet changing mission needs and threats. All NetOps tasks necessary to enable data access, information flow, and user collaboration across management boundaries or domains will be synchronized and executed at an appropriate level of detail. Commanders will beable to understand the state of the GIG as it relates to their missions and the associated tradeoffs in performance, security, and agility that could impact the mission. Warfighters and other users will be confident that the GIG can be tailored to meet their needs and can be leveraged to enhance the agility and effectiveness of their forces. NetOps capabilities will be developed, implemented, and matured as time-phased capability increments. These defined capability incrementswill be consistent with and supportive of the DoD’s evolving Net-Centric operational concepts. Transforming and maturing NetOps will involve work in many non-technical areas that span Doctrine, Organization, Training, Material, Leadership and Education, Personnel and Facilities (DOTMLPF). A critical aspect of NetOps transformation will be the creation of policy, governance structures, implementation plans, and metrics that will be necessary to guide NetOps evolution.

DoD NetOps Strategic Vision

The Net-Centric NetOps Strategic Vision Goals and

Objectives

The following sections describe a set of goals and objectives that are intended to serve as actionable guidance for achieving the NetOps Vision. The goals described in Table 1 are focused on achieving operational outcomes, not on developing and deploying specific technical implementations. This recognizes that the major hurdles associated with transforming NetOps are organizational, procedural, or cultural in nature. While there are also technical challenges, the Department must first and foremost fundamentally re-think how it conducts NetOps in order for the GIG to be truly responsive to mission needs and to effectively support operations in cyberspace. Each goal identifies high-priority objectives for meeting that goal.

Table 1. Goals for Net-Centric NetOps

Goals	Description
Share GIG Situational Awareness	Provide GIG users, operators, and commanders at all levels with accurate and timely information that enables a shared understanding of the health and mission readiness of the GIG
Unify GIG CIC	Adopt a unified C2 approach for agile proactive management of the GIG.
Institutionalize NetOps	Institutionalize NetOps across DOTMLPF to ensure DoD requirements, acquisition, budgeting, and management processes can be influenced to achieve the NetOps vision

4.1

Goal 1: Share GIG Situational Awareness

Provide GIG users, operators, and commanders at all levels with accurate and timely information that enables a shared understanding

of the health and mission readiness of the GIG.

4.1.1

Objective: Make NetOps data visible, accessible, and understandable to all authorized users Effective and efficient management of the GIG requires accurate, timely, and relevant situational awareness. Authorized users must be able to quickly find, access, retrieve, and analyze information related to the operational health, performance, security, and mission readiness of the GIG. Achieving this objective will require the adoption of Department-wide, industry based standards for posting and sharing NetOps information. This will ensure that authorized users, to include mission partners, will have access to the NetOps information they need to support operational missions. NetOps must move from a point-to-point information sharing model to one that exposes NetOps data and information to any authorized user (person or machine) using agreed-upon data models and mechanisms.

DoD NetOps Strategic Vision

Owners and managers of NetOps capabilities must comply with the DoD Net-Centric Data Strategy by making all NetOps datvisible, accessible, and unders tandable to all authorized users. This is necessary to support critical processes among NetOps centers; such as processes for fault identification, isolation, and correction, as well as those for information assurance and computer network defense activities. Adopting industry based standards will also improve the Department’s ability to share NetOps information with mission partners and commercial entities that support and provide information technology services and capabilities to the DoD. NetOps personnel and the users they support must be able to access NetOps data commensurate with its operational and security sensitivity and their assigned and authorized permissions. This means that it will be necessary to develop rules to govern access to NetOps data. NetOps data must also be made available in ways that support users equipped with different access mechanisms, (e.g. desktop or laptop versus personal digital assistants, etc.).

Finally it is no longer possible to predict inadvance all who might need access to NetOps information; therefore NetOps information sharing approaches must be able to accommodate the unanticipated or ad hoc user. For instance, a Combatant Command J4, who traditionally might not be considered a user of NetOps information, may want to know the reliability of a service that was not specifically developed for his mission. He might want to understand whether a Defense Logistics Agency service that provides order confirmation and availability status to wholesale logistics centers is reliable (i.e., operational all the time, endorsed by the people who rely on it, etc.).

4.1.2

Objective: Provide GIG Situational Awareness information in a mission context Commanders at all levels mustbe provided with the understanding of how events happening across the GIG impact their operations. NetOps personnel must make information related to the health and mission readiness of the GIG available to Commanders in a form that can be easily adapted to their mission context. Rather than simply informing a Commander that a network router is “down” or that a critical battlefield application service that operates over a satellite link is experiencing excessive delay, NetOpsmust have the ability to report an event

Leaked D.O.D document

2013-06-07T12:43:00.002-07:00

The following come from http://thedocs.hostzi.com According to my source,Anonymous got them. I gather they can't be THAT secret. Have fun with them.

Department of Defense

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (OASD) for Network Infrastructure and Integration (NII)

Configuration Management Plan

For

The DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF)
And
DoDAF Meta Model (DM2)

Version 1.0

3 October 201

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Revision History

This document is under the control of the Department of Defense Chief Information Officer (DoD CIO). Any changes to this document will be reflected by a document change record or by a complete revision.

Document DateRevision LevelChange DescriptionAffected Section(s)April 20101.0 DRAFTFirst DRAFT submitted to FAC for reviewALLMarch 20111.0 DRAFTResponse to FAC commentsALLOctober 20111.0 DRAFTRevision for change in FAC voting process, formal tasker process, baseline scheduling, and additional FAC commentsALL

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Table of Content

List of Figures and Tables

Introduction
1. Purpose
  1. Purposes of the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF)

The purpose of the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) is to support process improvement for the six core processes of DoD:

Joint Capabilities Integration and Development (JCIDS)
Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE)
Acquisition System (DAS)
Systems Engineering (SE)
Operations Planning
Capabilities Portfolio Management (CPM)

Purposes of the DoDAF Meta Model (DM2)

The DoDAF Meta Model (DM2) is the core of DoDAF. The purposes of DM2 are:

Provide the vocabulary for description and discourse about DoDAF models (formerly “products”) and core process usage.
Provide the basis for generation of the “physical” exchange specification for exchange of data between architecture tools and databases.
Provide a basis for semantic precision in architectural descriptions to support heterogeneous architectural description integration and analysis in support of core process decision making.
Support discovery and understandability of architecture data assets within the DoD Enterprise Architecture (EA) Community of Interest (COI) and with cross-COIs, discovery using DM2 categories of information, and understandability thru precise semantics augmented with linguistic traceability.
Support information sharing across the DoD Enterprise Architecture COI with precise, universally understood, and commonly interpretable semantics.

Purposes of DoDAF-DM2 Configuration Management (CM)

The purposes of DoDAF-DM2 Configuration Management (CM) are:

Governance. Provide a visible and clearly understood process for DoDAF-DM2 issue resolution and model improvement. Establish change activity that is controlled through a known, organized process so that there is a known basis for making change to architecture model, and a means for evaluating the effectiveness of that change. Establish procedures for interaction with related communities including related COIs, EA tool vendors, and semantic interoperability groups.
Product Improvement. Improve the ability to produce desired models and analyses that reflect customer need through common understanding of the definition and usage of the data. Provide a process for evaluation of present and future impact of proposed changes.
Baselines. Maintain stable DoDAF-DM2 baselines and clearly establish and provide community-wide awareness of DoDAF-DM2 developmental, operational, deprecated, and retired baselines. Ensure that all changes to any baseline can be traced to an approved change proposal and that the implementation status of changes can be verified.
COI. Provide a means to continuously re-assess and improve information sharing within the DoD EA COI and with related COIs, to determine requirements for information sharing, and to monitor and measure progress within the DoD EA COI.

A configuration management program provides an orderly way to facilitate change, based on need, and utilizes best practices and performances standards to ensure that expectations are realized, efficiency is increased, reliability and maintainability is assured, and stability achieved.

Scope

This plan applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Military Services, the Combatant Commands and Defense Agencies at all levels involved in the development, employment, and maintenance of enterprise architecture models and data. The scope of this DoDAF-DM2 Configuration Management Plan (CMP) is:

Configuration Identification (CI)
Configuration Management Organizational Roles and Interactions
DoDAF-DM2 CM Processes and Procedures
DoDAF-DM2 CM Business Rules
Configuration Status Accounting

Definitions

Reference (Military Handbook Configuration Management Guidance), “Military Handbook Configuration Management Guidance”, states, “DoD has adopted ANSI/EIA-649, “National Consensus Standard for Configuration Management,” as the guiding document providing the basic principles of Configuration Management. Consequently, this CMP adopts terminology and processes from Reference (National Consensus Standard for Configuration Management), “National Consensus Standard for Configuration Management”. . As stated in Reference (National Consensus Standard for Configuration Management),

The configuration management process facilitates orderly management of product information and product changes for such beneficial purposes as to revise capability; improve performance, reliability, or maintainability; extend life; reduce cost; reduce risk and liability; or correct defects. The relatively minimal cost of implementing configuration management is returned many fold in cost avoidance. The lack of configuration management, or its ineffectual implementation, can be very expensive and sometimes can have such catastrophic consequences as failure of equipment or loss of life.

It prescribes processes and procedures for:

The orderly establishment, documentation, and maintenance of a product's functional, performance and physical attributes

Management of changes to the attributes

Access to accurate information essential to the product's development, fabrication, production, use, maintenance, procurement, and eventual disposal..

Reference (National Consensus Standard for Configuration Management) defines a flexible, but well-defined standard employed most often at the ‘enterprise’ level. Its flexibility lies in the ability to provide CM practices that can be selectively applied to the degree necessary for each of the areas to be covered under this plan. Thus, while the standard will be the guide for development of the plan, its principles should not stifle necessary change without undue complexity. Rather, changes that are complex will require more stringent application of technical review, especially on the impact of potential change, than less complex proposals that may be expedited as administrative or logistical changes that do not require the same treatment.
Key terms are defined below. A complete glossary of terms, acronyms, and abbreviations is included at the end of this document.

Configuration Management (CM): a management discipline that applies technical and administrative direction over the life cycle of an item to:
Identify and document the functional and physical characteristics of configuration items (CIs) (configuration identification)
Control changes to configuration items and their associated documentation (configuration control)
Record and report information needed to manage configuration items effectively, including the status of proposed changes and the implementation status of approved changes (status accounting)
Audit CIs to verify conformance to requirements (configuration audit)
Configuration Item (CI): an aggregation of metadata, and occasionally data on architecture components, processes, or data that is designated for configuration management and treated as a single entity in the configuration management process. (E.g., NetViz net file, Core Systems and Quantities List, etc.) [Adapted from ISO 10007:1995(E)]
Baseline: the configuration of a model formally established at a specific point in time, which serves as a reference for further activities. [ISO 10007:1995(E)]
Release: the formal notification and distribution of an approved baseline version of a configuration item.
Change Request (CR): A formal request for a major and/or specific change to a CI.
Change Request Tracker (CRT): A database used to track submitted CRs to any configuration item and to document all actions that add, delete, or change a configuration item.
Configuration Status Accounting Report (CSAR). A formal document prepared monthly that summarizes all DoDAF-DM2 Working Group (WG) activities during the monthly period, WG membership participation over the period, and all WG recommendations prioritization and adjudication of CRs.
Version Description Document (VDD). A formal document issued with each DoDAF-DM2 baseline that describes all changes from the prior baseline in summary and detailed form.

Applicable Documents

Reference Number and TitleDocument Control NumberAuthorDateNational Consensus Standard for Configuration ManagementANSI/GEIA Standard EIA 649-AAmerican National Standards InstituteArchitecture and Standards Review Group (ASRG) CONOPS DoD CIOFeb 2010Systems and software engineering — Architecture descriptionISO/IEC WD4 42010

IEEE P42010/D5Jan 2009Military Handbook Configuration Management GuidanceMIL-HDBK-61A(SE)DUSD (AT&L)Feb 2001

Configuration Identification

The DoDAF-DM2 Configuration Items and their associated data items are:

DoDAF Viewpoint Definitions. Conventions for the construction, interpretation and use of architecture views and associated architecture models.
DoDAF Model Specifications. Specifications from which architecture views representing a architecture are composed.
Data Dictionary. Defines all non-demotic terms used in DoDAF and the DoDAF Meta Model.
DM2. Consists of a Conceptual Data Model (CDM) diagram and narrative description, a Logical Data Model (LDM) in an UML file adapted to IDEAS and a narrative description, and Physical Exchange Specification (PES) XML Schema Descriptions.

NOTE that introductory, tutorial, document outlining, and web navigation documentation is considered under control of the DoDAF Journal editorial team and not subject to formal CM in scope of this plan.
DoDAF-DM2 baselines are statused as “DoDAF Version 2.xx” and “DM2 Version 2.xx” where xx is a sequential number assigned to each baseline. The status of DoDAF-DM2 baselines follows the nomenclature established by the DoD MDR as follows:

Operational: This is the current baseline approved for use throughout the DoD EA COI. In addition, this status indicates the Namespace Manager has deemed the baseline of sufficient quality to be used by other COI’s. This baseline is frozen and cannot change.
Developmental: This is the future operational baseline and the baseline the FAC directs the DoDAF-DM2 WG to work with. DoDAF-DM2 CRs are applied against this baseline.
Deprecated: These baselines are still valid for use but will be retired in the near future.
Retired: These baselines are no longer valid to use.

Deprecated and retired baselines will be kept in an archive.

Organizational Roles, Responsibilities, and Interactions

As per Reference (Architecture and Standards Review Group (ASRG) CONOPS), “Architecture and Standards Review Group (ASRG) CONOPS”, there are three organizations involved in CM of the DoDAF-DM2 CI’s. They are shown outlined with the yellow background in Error: Reference source not found and described in the following subparagraphs.

Figure 3 . DoDAF-DM2 CM Organizational Relationships

Architecture and Standards Review Group (ASRG)

For purposes of DoDAF-DM2 CM, the ASRG has the assigned authority and responsibility to approve configuration baselines and make decisions on configuration and its management.

The mission of the ASRG is to review and provide architecture policy and guidance, identify IT technical standards, oversee IT standards management, review and approve architectures as fit for federation, assess compliance with architecture policy, and oversee DOD EA Federation. [Adapted from ASRG CONOPS and ISO 10007:1995(E)] The ASRG serves within the DoD CIO Enterprise Governance framework. The ASRG is subordinate to the DOD CIO Enterprise Governance Board (EGB). It is chartered to: review architecture policy and guidance; identify DoD Information technology (IT) technical standards; oversee IT standards management; review architectures and enforce architecture policy; oversee DoD EA Federation; and enforce DoD Information Enterprise Architecture (IEA) compliance. The ASRG receives its authority to perform these duties from the DoD CIO Governance Board Restructure Implementation and EGB Charter, as authorized in DoD Directive 5144.1, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration/DoD Chief Information Officer (ASD(NII)/DoD CIO).
The ASRG is co-chaired by the DoD CIO’s Director of Enterprise Architecture and Standards, and the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Chief Systems Engineer. The ASRG meets quarterly or as requirements dictate. Chief Architects and Chief Engineers from the military services, selected Combatant Commands and Defense Agencies, USD (AT&L), Joint Staff J6, and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) CIO comprise this group. the ASRG works through a dedicated secretariat, standing groups, and ad hoc working groups to execute its responsibilities. The standing groups that report directly to the ASRG include the Information Technology Standards Committee (ITSC), Global Information Grid (GIG) Technical Guidance Configuration Management Board (GTG CMB), and FAC. Each has subordinate working groups. Ad hoc groups will also be constituted as needed to work specific issues related to policy, compliance criteria, reference models, and related issues in the EA and standards domains. Support will be provided by member organizations, and existing groups will re-align under the ASRG as applicable. The Enterprise Reference Architecture Cell, an element of the Enterprise Architecture and Infrastructure Directorate, will also provide support to the ASRG. ASRG membership is at the FO/GO/SES level and has representatives from
DoD CIO (Director
EA and Infrastructure Directorate
Co-Chair)
DISA (Chief Systems Engineer
Co-Chair)
DNI CIO (Chief Architect )
USD (AT&L) (Deputy Director
Systems Engineering )
USD (Intelligence) (Chief Architect )
USD (P&R) (Director of Information Management )
Army (Chief Architect )
Department of Navy (Chief Architect )
USMC (Chief Architect )
Air Force (Chief Architect )
DCMO (Chief Architect )
Joint Staff J6 (Vice Director for C4 Systems )
STRATCOM (Chief Architect )
JFCOM (Chief Architect )
NSA (Chief Architect )
DNI CIO (Chief Engineer )
Army (Chief Engineer )
Department of Navy (Chief Engineer )
Air Force (Chief Engineer )
Joint Staff J6 (Chief Engineer )
JFCOM (Chief Engineer )
NSA (Chief Engineer )

Federated Architecture Committee (FAC)

The mission of the FAC is to serve as the Architecture Community of Interest (COI) for the formulation and exchange of DoD architecture concepts, guidance, and policy and to review and recommend to the ASRG that Capability Segment, Reference, Component, and Enterprise-wide Solution architectures are fit for federation into the DoD EA. FAC membership consists of O6-level or civilian equivalent Enterprise Architects and associated managerial and technical professionals, responsible for overseeing architecture programs and activities within their organizations. The FAC is chaired by the DoD CIO EA and Infrastructure Directorate on behalf of the DoD Chief Architect. The Chair reports to the ASRG. The FAC will meet monthly or as required by the Chair. [Adapted from ASRG CONOPS and ISO 10007:1995(E)]
For purposes of DoDAF-DM2 CM, the FAC is a board composed of technical and administrative representatives with the assigned authority and responsibility to review configuration baselines and to recommend approval to the ASRG. The FAC reviews CR adjudication recommendations from the DoDAF-DM2 WG and votes to accept, reject, or defer these recommendations. The FAC shall consider changes to DoDAF-DM2 for reasons that can be traced to:
changes needed to eliminate newly discovered internal inconsistencies in the model, or regular model maintenance and clean up,
changes needed to make the model implementable in tools,
new (or so far unmet) user community requirements, for example changes needed as a result of changing DoD processes, such as definitions in JCIDS or acquisition processes, new directives, etc.),
changes in definition, or application of architecture modeling principles and tool application (e.g. release of a new related industry standard such as OASIS Reference Architecture).

DoDAF-DM2 WG

The DoDAF-DM2 WG is an advisory group to the FAC. Whereas the FAC is relatively small formal voting body, the WG is a large collaborative body. The DoDAF-DM2 WG has hundreds of members from Government, military, industry, academia, and vendor communities. The DoDAF-DM2 WG oversees, reviews, and makes recommendations to the FAC on matters related to the DoDAF-DM2. The DoDAF-DM2 WG provides the subject-matter expertise necessary to provide informed and broad-based recommendations to the FAC. An overview of the relationship between the FAC and the WG is shown in Error: Reference source not found; details of the interaction are provided in section DoDAF-DM2 CM Processes and Procedures of this CM Plan.

DoDAF-DM2 WG Roles

The DoDAF-DM2 WG is internally organized into a Functional Configuration Manager (FCM), CI Custodians (one per DoDAF-DM2 CI), and the WG members.

The FCM conducts the WG meetings, performs the day-to-day duties of organizing the WG, maintains the DoDAF-DM2 Action Item system, reports to the FAC, including regular submission of DoDAF-DM2 Configuration Status Accounting Reports (CSAR), maintains the ARCH Namespace on the DoD MDR, represents the DoDAF-DM2 WG at related COI, DoD MDR, and other forums, and establishes DoDAF-DM2 baselines.
Designated CI Custodians maintain the CI baselines. DoDAF-DM2 CI Custodians are agents who are appointed to maintain specific DoDAF-DM2 CI’s. CI Custodians will research, analyze, and make recommendations on DoDAF-DM2 CRs and implement approved changes to designated CI’s as directed by the FCM.
DoDAF-DM2 WG members. Membership is voluntary and there are no pre-requisites for membership. Members are from Government, military, industry, academia, and vendor communities. No restrictions were made because they tend to stifle input and alienate organizations. However, the DoDAF-DM2 WG follows business rules that channel diverse member views and inputs productively. Members representing DoD components are expected to ensure their components are aware of ongoing work and inform the FAC accordingly.
The DoDAF-DM2 WG interacts with the following organizations as shown in Error: Reference source not found. Roles of these organizations with respect to DoDAF-DM2 CM are as follows:
The International Defense Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS) Group is developing a formal ontology to facilitate interoperability of Enterprise Architecture (EA) models. Members are the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Sweden with observation by NATO.
Industry Advisory and Standards Groups to include OMG and OASIS.
Related COI’s to include UCORE and C2 Core
Controlled Vocabulary groups
Pilots and Early Adopters
DoD Architecture Registry System (DARS) WG
DoD Metadata Working Group (DoD MWG).
DoD COI Forum.
EA Tool Vendors

Figure 3 . FAC - DoDAF-DM2 WG Organizational Relationships Overview

DoDAF-DM2 CM Processes and Procedures

DoDAF-DM2 CM is accomplished by the following major process types:

CR Processing and Configuration Status Reporting
Preparation of Draft Baseline, Baseline Review, Resolution, and Release

Each of these is described in the following subparagraphs.

CR Processing and Configuration Status Reporting

A typical monthly DoDAF-DM2 CM process is shown in Figure 4-2. Each of the tasks is described in detail in the following subparagraphs.

Maintain Membership

The FCM will record attendance at scheduled WG meetings and update the membership information as needed with the following:

Name: The name of the individual attending the Work Group.
Employer: The company which employs the individual
Organization/Project Supported: Project supported by individual.
Principal ASRG/FAC Association: Organization represented by member.
Email: Contact Email for the attendee.
2nd Email: Secondary Email for contacting the attendee: (optional)
3rd Email: Tertiary Email for contacting the attendee: (optional)

Enter New CRs

DoDAF-DM2 CRs can be submitted via the DoDAF-DM2 Working Group website or provided to the FCM by email or at meetings. New CRs are entered into the CRT with:

Number: A sequential number assigned to a specific CR.
Title: A descriptive name assigned to a specific CR.
Description: A detailed description of the CR, including any and all suggested resolutions
Date Submitted: Date the CR was added to the CR/DB tracking database.
Source: Name of individual submitting the CR.
Source Organization: Organization of the individual submitting the CR.
Configuration Item (CI): The CI which the CR is about from Table 1.
Data Group/ Model/ Other: Part of the CI which the CR specifically requests to be changed.
Level of Effort (LOE): Estimate of the resources needed to adjudicate the request as High (H), Medium (M), or Low (L). The default value for new CRs is M.
Priority: Importance to submitter and overall usability of the CI as High (H), Medium (M), or Low (L). The default value for new CRs is M.
Core Process Category: One of six Core Process listed in paragraph 1.1, if reference by submission.
Description of Core Process Requirement: A description extracted from the CR if provided.
Status. New CRs are statused as Unassigned.

Figure 4 . CR Processing and Configuration Status Reporting

Prepare Agenda and Readaheads

The FCM prepares an agenda of significant events since the last WG meeting, proposed actions based upon requests from last DoDAF-DM2 WG, prioritization from the FAC, inputs from other DoDAF venues, and periodic needs, e.g., to status “in progress” CRs. The typical agenda contains announcements and reports of significant events, status update for “in progress” CRs, presentations by submitters and/or Actionee(s) of new or in progress CRs, starting point in the excel spread sheet for next CRs for consideration and discussion, and time to suggest topics for the next meeting.
The FCM also includes in the Email agenda notification a link with a read-ahead for the upcoming WG from Reference and Research and other material and statuses a numeric summary of DoDAF-DM2 CRs by Status, Priority, and LOE. The FCM also notifies members of any new or updated Research and Reference material on the DoDAF-DM2 Collaboration Site. When a new CR is ready for consideration to the WG, it is proposed as a regular WG meeting agenda item.

Conduct WG Meeting

The FCM moderates the conduct of the meeting according to the agenda including:

Assisting members and quest with achieving proper access to the collaboration environment, taking attendance and recording contact information for new members.
Introducing and regulating the sharing of status and any special briefings on agenda topics.
When an agenda item for a new CR is queued, the FCM aids CR originator: (Note if the CR Originator does not present at scheduled the bi-weekly WG meeting, the unassigned CR is “Moved” to the bottom of queue and it is now in CR trackers rotation discussion queue)
in the briefing the WG,
presenting additional materials to the WG, including ones submitted in real-time by WG members,
advising WG members of DoDAF-DM2 Business Rules as established and described in paragraph DoDAF-DM2 CM Business Rules, herein,
and facilitating orderly, time-limited, and productive discussion.
If the working group decides to accept the CR, then the next decision is to determine how it will be implemented. This could include discussion to determine:
If the CR requires long term research and/or determination of some Course of Action (CoA) and associated Actionee(s) or
If the CR can be resolved without further research.
If it can be handled through a simple fix or change (e.g. short textual rewrite with in document), it will be resolved during the current WG discussion and:
The change is made to the appropriate CI working copy, and
Documented in the CR Tracking system with the status of “In Version 2.XX” and recording of what was done and the date the action was taken.
If, after discussion, the WG decided there is need for establishing an CoA, they can choice one of the following actions after following the Originator/Actionee research process outlined in paragraph 4.1.3 below. They do so via mutual consent of the WG attendees (no formal voting process is used): The Action decision shall be recorded with rational in the Action field of the CRT. The date of decision is recorded in the Action Updated Date, Action is recorded in the Action column, and Actionee(s) assigned Actionee(s) may be updated. The following are possible Status:
In general, if the new CR will require significant time and resources for accomplishment, it will be added to a prioritized list of items that will be addressed through major revisions or formal updates. The significance of the CR will be considered for prioritizing its placement within scheduled revisions or updates as decided by the working group. Once the CI has been included in a formal revision, this information will be passed to the ASRG Secretariat who will inform the submitter of the CIs disposition (See paragraph 4.1.6).
Just like new CRs, When the agenda calls for review of existing DoDAF-DM2 CRs (CR tracking system) or CI Custodian actions , they are queued for consideration by the WG on a rotating basis. After Actionee(s) provide research findings and subsequent WG discussion, the WG decisions are entry into the CR tracking system again based on mutual consent of the WG attendees (no formal voting process is used). If after Actionee(s) presentation the CR now is considered completed or involves change beyond the requirements baseline of DoDAF-DM2 (core process modeling), or is technically incorrect, inconsistent, or suboptimal, it will be Status appropriately using one of the codes listed in f above. A rationale is recorded in the Action field in the CRT.
All Completed CRs are reported to the FAC via the WG activity Summary CSAR. Minority member non-concurrence can be report to the FAC through the members FAC representative. Details in reporting to FAC are in paragraph 4.1.6 below.
The FAC can vote to redirect CR priorities recommended by the WG and/or request further consideration of statused and/or non-concurred CRs.
When the FCM receives instructions on redirections from the FAC, the topics will be added to the agenda for the next Bi-weekly WG meeting.
The redirection will be discussed with the CR originator/CR actionee(s) for possible Action impact and the WG again discuss options.
If the Action impacts business rules or Program vendors, these impacts along with new recommendation from the WG will be reported to the FAC at the same time as the CSAR is sent for FAC consideration as per Paragraph 4.1.6 below.

Update CR Status

When the WG Actionee(s) present findings to the WG for review, The Status, Action, Action Update Date, Actionee(s), CI Change Date and/or WG Approve Date will be change to reflect the consensus of the WG.

Research Topic

Originator/Actionee recommendation process: Actionee(s) perform preliminary research and prepares a brief for the WG. Research materials are provided to the FCM for posting on the DoDAF-DM2 URL collaboration site.

Maintain Working Group Collaboration Site

Material prepared for briefing initial new CRs by originator(s) or Action Item research discussions will be added to content which can be found on the work group collaboration tab on to the http://cio-nii.defense.gov/sites/dodaf20/ web site.

Implement Directed Solution.

The CI Custodian implements the solution as directed by the DoDAF-DM2 WG (paragraph 4.1.2.3.h.3), taking care to maintain consistency with all other CI’s and data items, particularly the Data Dictionary.

Conduct Ad Hoc WG Sessions

The Actionee(s) may require addition discussion to complete Research topics. Meetings with selected WG membership will be conducted as required.

Report to FAC

The FCM reports to the FAC at each monthly FAC meeting. At the meeting, the FCM also receives direction on WG priorities and technical courses of actions and solutions. The FAC specifically reviews priorities recommended by the WG, resolves problems and issues that cannot be resolved within the WG, provides additional guidance from the Community of Interest perspective, and approves or redirects the priorities. This information, guidance and approved priorities are given to the FCM for conduct of future WG activities. An overview of the data exchange is shown in Figure 4-.

WG Activity summary information briefing
Other information briefings of significant recommendations being considered
Configuration Status Accounting Report (CSAR) document for information
Process CR Redirects

Figure 4 . Monthly Reporting Cycle

DoDAF Specific Processing

Processing specific to DoDAF CRs (as indicated by the CI field in the CRT) is shown in Figure 4-. Note that if the analysis leads to a need for new or changed term or relationship, the process then leads into the DM2 specific processing described in paragraph DoDAF Specific Processing,

View request process: If the CR requests deletion of a view or artifact within a view, perform paragraph Artifact deletion request:, below; otherwise perform paragraph New or changed view request: below.
New or changed view request:
Determine if the CR requires new views or new or changed artifacts and, if so, determine if the view or artifact is required by core process governance. If the new view or artifact or change is required by a Core Process, continue CR processing; otherwise reject.
If a new artifact is being requested, determine if the artifact is included in an existing view. If the artifact is already in an existing view but a specific subset is required by Core Process governance, then proceed with CR processing; otherwise reject.
If nether a new view or artifact nor a changed artifact is being requested, determine if the CR is for improved consistency, description quality, or other view description style guide issues. If so, continue CR processing; otherwise reject.
Determine if CR requires a new of changed term. If the answer is Yes, perform DM2 Data Dictionary CR processing as described in paragraph DoDAF Specific Processing.
Determine if the CR requires a new relationship. . If the answer is Yes, perform DM2 Data Dictionary CR processing as described in paragraph DoDAF Specific Processing.
Construct the CR view requested IAW the view description style guide: Determine the name for the new relationship, create a “one-liner” of the new relationship, construct a description of the relationship, suggest Core Process usage of the new relationship, and provide a DM2 mapping of the new relationship. When these are completed, propose that the CR is done and request schedule for WG review.
Artifact deletion request:
Determine is artifact is required by core process governance. If the answer is No, perform paragraph Deleted artifact from View. If as a result of the deletion of this artifact, the view no longer has any artifacts, propose that below, else
Determine if artifacts are included in some other suitable existing view. If the answer is Yes, continue CR processing; otherwise reject CR.
Determine if the manner in which the artifact is contained in the view proposed for deletion is required by Core Process governance for a particular reason. It the answer is No, continue CR processing; otherwise reject CR.
Deleted artifact from View. If as a result of the deletion of this artifact, the view no longer has any artifacts, propose that the entire view be deleted; otherwise, create modified view with artifacts deleted.
Notify Core Process governance owners of any changes proposed to cited views.

Figure 4 Detailed DoDAF CR Processing

DM2 Specific Processing

Processing specific to DM2 CRs (as indicated by the CI field in the CRT) is shown in Figure 4-.

The CR is reviewed to determine if it requires a new term or definition change/DM2 relationship change
A determination is made to evaluate if a new term is requested. If the answer is yes follow procedures in b below, else follow procedures in c below
Data Dictionary Process:
Collect source definitions and enter in the Data Dictionary. Particularly important when considering new independent classes is researching multiple source definitions and aliases.
Review and pick or formulate definition
Make determination of definition status. If the definition can be aliased follow procedures in 4 step below, else follow new definition process in step 5 below
Map Alias into appropriate location in the Data Dictionary and prepare for WG presentation (END).
Determine the supertype of the new definition using the BORO analysis technique.
Determine relationship in the DM2 by going to paragraph d below
A determination is made to evaluate the nature of the relationship change. If an new relationship is required follow procedures in d below and consider alternatives in f below
New Relationship: If a new relationship is not required go to step e below, else perform the following:
Relationship Process: Determine supertype using the BORO analysis process.
If a super type can be determined, make change to DM2 and to Data Dictionary (paragraph b above) else
Determine if the relationship should be aliased. If alias is selected add the alias to the Data Dictionary, else propose that the CR be rejected and request schedule for WG review (END).
Evaluate relationship integration impact:
What definitions and other requirements are effected by changed relationships
If the changed relationship has no impact on the model make change to DM2 and request schedule for WG review (END), else consider alternatives
Alternatives:
Consider possible alternatives and if there are none
Propose that the CR be rejected and request schedule for WG review (END).

Figure 4 . DM2 CR Processing

Baseline Process

This process happens in two phases. The first phase is preparation of baseline for FAC approval for component review and the second phase is the adjudication of component comments and publishing the new baseline. Figure 4- shows the first phase required to prepare DM2 and DoDAF inputs for FAC approval. Figure 4- shows the review, resolution, and release process. A notional timeline for a DoDAF-DM2 version development and release is shown in Figure 4-.

Figure 4 . Notional DoDAF-DM2 Version Timeline

Announce to WG technical cutoff meeting

The FCM prepares an agenda of significant events since the last WG meeting, proposed actions based upon requests from last DoDAF-DM2 WG, prioritization from the FAC, inputs from other DoDAF venues, and order for “done” and “in progress” CRs to be presented. The cutoff meeting agenda contains announcements and reports of significant events, the actionee(s) briefing the “done” and “in progress” CRs , and time to suggest topics for the next meeting.
The FCM also includes in the Email agenda notification a link with a read-ahead for the upcoming WG from Reference and Research. The FCM also notifies members of specific material to be presented and its location in the Research and Reference material section on the DoDAF-DM2 Collaboration Site.

The FCM will notify WG membership of intentions to prepare a new baseline.
Announcing a technical cutoff from CR solutions and implementations.
The FCM will ask WG membership, who are CR actionee(s), to identify completed and ready for review “done” CR requests.
The WG membership will also review “in progress” CRs for consideration.
The FCM will announce a proposed date for the Technical Cutoff meeting.

Figure 4 Baseline preparation

Conduct technical cutoff meeting

The FCM moderates the cutoff meeting according to the agenda including:

Assisting members and quest with achieving proper access to the collaboration environment, taking attendance and recording contact information for new members.
Introducing and regulating the sharing of status and any special briefings on agenda topics.
When an agenda item for a “done” or CR is queued, the FCM aids actionee(s) in :
briefing the WG,
presenting additional materials to the WG, including improvements submitted in real-time by WG members,
advising WG members of DoDAF-DM2 Business Rules as established and described in paragraph DoDAF-DM2 CM Business Rules , herein,
and facilitating orderly, time-limited, and productive discussion of baseline inclusion.
When the agenda calls for review of “done” CRs (CR tracking system), they are presented to the WG membership. After Actionee(s) provide research findings and subsequent WG discussion, The WG decides if the CR is ready for baseline release. Approved CR are statused in the CR tracking system as “in version 2.xx” and others are re-status using codes from paragraph 4.1.2.3 and return to queue. All WG decisions are entry into the CR tracking system again based on mutual consent of the WG attendees (no formal voting process is used). The vetting process is similar to that listed for papa 4.1.2.3 but specifically include:
Approved for baseline release CRs are given a WG approved date of the meeting.
All other CRs will be given Updated status (e.g. defer, in progress for 2.XX+01., etc.) and given an Action Update Date of the meeting.
When an agenda item for a “in progress” CR is queued, the FCM aids actionee(s) in:
briefing the WG,
presenting additional materials to the WG, including improvements submitted in real-time by WG members,
advising WG members of DoDAF-DM2 Business Rules as established and described in paragraph DoDAF-DM2 CM Business Rules , herein,
and facilitating orderly, time-limited, and productive discussion of baseline inclusion.
When the agenda calls for review of “in progress” CRs (CR tracking system), they are presented to the WG membership. After Actionee(s) provide research findings and subsequent WG discussion, The WG decides if the CR is ready for baseline release. Approved CR are statused in the CR tracking system as “in version 2.xx” and others are re-status using codes from paragraph 4.1.2.3 and return to queue. All WG decisions are entry into the CR tracking system again based on mutual consent of the WG attendees (no formal voting process is used). The vetting process is similar to that listed for papa 4.1.2.3 but specifically include:
Approved for baseline release CRs are given a WG approved date of the meeting
All other CRs will be given Updated status (e.g. “in progress” for next version) and given an Action Update Date of the meeting.
Minority member non-concurrence for any CRs approved for baseline can be report to the FAC through the members FAC representative.

Reporting to FAC During Baseline Cutoff

The FCM reports to the FAC at each monthly FAC meeting. At the meeting, the FCM will report on CRs to be included in the baseline release, CRs plan for version, and the version release timeline and any issues. The FCM also receives direction on WG priorities and technical courses of actions and solutions. The FAC specifically reviews priorities recommended by the WG, resolves problems and issues that cannot be resolved within the WG, provides additional guidance from the Community of Interest perspective, and approves or redirects the priorities. This information, guidance and approved priorities are given to the FCM for conduct of future WG activities.

Prepare baseline review documentation

The FCM will direct the CI and CR Custodians to prepare documentation for Component review to include:

Finalize implementations
Perform QA using various IDEAS Group and DoDAF-DM2 Custodian tools
Update definitions in EA file from Data Dictionary
Generate XSDs from Data Dictionary and Mappings Excel and EA UML files
Update all description documents
Prepare a Version Description Document (VDD) that describes changes to the DoDAF-DM2 in the new version. The VDD will be uploaded to all the DoDAF-DM2 distribution points. This will be prepared from CRT by changing Action field to describe the change actually made.
Rename all new baseline files from ISO date stamps to version stamping
On MDR, deprecate v2.xx and post v2.xx+01 to Operational status. All ARCH namespace and DoD EA COI subscribers notified of the update.
Provide all data items to DoD CIO webmasters for posting and HTML regeneration
Archive v2.xx on DoDAF-DM2 Collaboration Site, post new baseline, and create working copy for v2.xx+.02 with ISO date file stamping

When the draft documentation is complete, the FCM will request its entry into the SACP and prepare a “tasker” for FAC to request Component review of proposed “draft” baseline.

Adjudication of Component Comments

The FAC will collect component comments and forward them to the FCM for adjudication:

The FCM will direct the CI Custodian to re-status the CRs with component comments.
The FCM will include the comments in the agenda for the next WG meeting.
The FCM will use the normal WG meeting processes (paragraph 4.1.2) to resolve comments.
The FCM will relay WG decisions to the FAC in monthly CSAR report (paragraph 4.1.6)
When all comments have been resolved and the FAC has not redirects the FCM based on the CSAR report and FCM briefing. The FCM will begin Baseline production.

Perform Baseline Production and QA

The FCM will direct the CI and CR Custodians to prepare final documentation for baseline release to include:

Finalize implementations
Perform QA using various IDEAS Group and DoDAF-DM2 Custodian tools
Update definitions in EA file from Data Dictionary
Generate XSDs from Data Dictionary and Mappings Excel and EA UML files
Update all description documents
Prepare a Version Description Document (VDD) that describes changes to the DoDAF-DM2 in the new version. The VDD will be uploaded to all the DoDAF-DM2 distribution points. This will be prepared from CRT by changing Action field to describe the change actually made.
Rename all new baseline files from ISO date stamps to version stamping
On MDR, deprecate v2.xx and post v2.xx+01 to Operational status. All ARCH namespace and DoD EA COI subscribers notified of the update.
Provide all data items to DoD CIO webmasters for posting and HTML regeneration
Archive v2.xx on DoDAF-DM2 Collaboration Site, post new baseline, and create working copy for v2.xx+.02 with ISO date file stamping

Provide Recommendation to ASRG

The FCM will prepare promulgation notice for the FAC to present to the ASRG. Upon ASRG approval, the ASRG approval recommendation will be provided to the DoDAF community distribution and a news article will be posted in the DoDAF Journal.

Publish New Baseline

The FCM and Custodians will update the CI locations deprecating the prior version, and archiving older versions. The FAC, WG, and DoDAF community via community events such as the DoD EA Conference and DoDAF Plenaries will be notified of the publication.

Figure 4 Release Baseline Process

DoDAF-DM2 CM Business Rules

Business rule govern the conduct of the DoDAF-DM2 WG CM processes. The business rules that apply to the DoDAF-DM2 WG are of two types, one pertaining to the CIs and the the other pertaining to the conduct of the WG. The former are shown in Table 5- and the latter in Table 5-.

Table 5 . DoDAF-DM2 Model Specification RulesRule NameDescriptionTerms and DefinitionsAll model and alias terms proposed for inclusion in the data dictionary shall be researched for multiple source definitions. DoD definitions shall be included. Other Federal Government, industry and academic and common definitions should also be included. The WG shall formulate a baseline definition based on the multiple sources, core process requirements, and model structural meaning. The source definitions and the rationale for the baseline definition shall be maintained in the data dictionary as well.AliasesTerms representing concepts that are represented in a semantically equivalent way by other terms and concepts in the model shall be maintained as aliases and shall not be introduced into the model. Multiple source definitions shall be maintained as with other model terms and a consensus definition shall be derived from the sources. Core Process RequirementAll concepts included in the DM2 shall be necessary to support the information requirements of one or more core processes (PPBE, DAS, JCIDS, CPM, SE, OPS). All DoDAF models shall be applicable to one or more core processes. Core process information requirements shall be as explicitly or implicitly specified in current or planned DoD governance. All model terms and concepts not necessary for core process support with architectures shall be removed. All core process information requirements for architectural descriptions shall be modeled and contained in one or more DoDAF models.Aggregation RuleIf a term representing a concept differs structurally from some other term representing some concept only in level of aggregation, it shall not be included in the model. Whole-part relationships cover the need without different names for different types of wholes and parts. The term may be included as an alias.Subtype RuleIf a term representing a subtype concept has no structural difference from its supertype, it shall not be included in the model. Super-subtype relationships cover the need without different names for different types of supertypes and subtypes. The term may be included as an alias.Typed RelationshipsAll relationships shall be typed, ultimately up to IDEAS foundation. The typing shall be determined using BORO analysis of spatio-temporal examples.Attributes and PropertiesAll attribute and property relationships shall be explicit, that is, by an association class that is typed according to the Typed Relationships rule. The only exceptions are for representational exemplars.DoDAF model specificationAll DoDAF models shall be specified using terms from the data dictionary. Aliases may be used. If new terms are required, they shall undergo the process for new term inclusion in the data dictionary as described by the Terms and Definitions and Aliases rules. All DoDAF models shall be mapped to the DM2 classes (base and associative) that represent the information contained in the view the model specifies.Information PedigreeThere shall be a provision to provide pedigree (and provenance) for every piece of data IAW NCDSSecurity classification markingThere shall be a provision to provide a classification marking for every piece of data and for DM2 PES XML documents overall IAW NCDS

Table 5 . DoDAF-DM2 Working Group Process RulesRule NameDescriptionDecision ProcessDecisions on CM processes, CRs, etc., are reached via mutual consent of the WG attendees (no formal voting process is used). Attendance is taken at each meeting, notes are logged and AIs/CRs are statused.DoDAF-DM2 work share siteMaintains reference and research materials for WG.Maintain DoDAF-DM2 descriptionsPart of CDM and LDM CI’s. Formerly, DoDAF Volume I, Section 9, and Volume II, Section 2WG CR cross-referencing and report-outFor CRs coordinated with DoDAF and/or DARS WG, maintain CR cross-referencing and ensure report-out at CR closure.Modification to DDMS DoD EA COI Extensions and other DoDAF-DM2 architectural description metadataCoordination with DARS WG.Organizational IntroductionConsideration of impact of change on existing and/or on-going architecture and engineering efforts. Timing, degree of impact, “grandfathering’, and backwards compatibility will be considered.Quality AssuranceQuality and clarity of proposed changeWG CR cross-referencing and report-outMonthly CR status reports generated from the CRT.XSD ContentVia LDM CI data item that maps DM2 LDM to DoDAF models.ExtensionsA core that can be extended by user communities, so as not to try to cover all user detail. Extenders should be careful to not create redundant representations. Extensions (subtypes (e.g., Unified Modeling Language (UML) specializations), additional attribution, and concepts beyond scope of DoDAF-DM2) to the DoDAF-DM2 are expected and can be done by architecture development efforts. If an extension becomes widespread, it may be appropriate to submit a change request to the DoDAF so that it can be considered by the DoDAF Change Control Board and the Data Working Group for inclusion in the baseline DoDAF-DM2Configuration Status Accounting
1. CR Tracker (CRT)

CRs are tracked via system that records all actions, plans, status, and dispositions for CRs. The CR tracker has the following fields:

Table 6 . CRT FieldsFieldDefinitionValuesNo.Sequential number for DoDAF / DM2 action items and change requests assigned by the DoDAF / DM2 WG secretariat.Natural numbersTitleShort title of action item or change request for convenient reference by WG.TextDescriptionAction item or change request as submitted by submitter.TextDate SubmittedDate submitted.dd mmm yyyySourceSubmitter individual, group, venue, etc.TextSource OrganizationSubmitter organization.TextCIThe Configuration Item to which the CR pertains.DoDAF Viewpoint, DoDAF Model, and / or DM2Data Group / Model / ViewpointThe DoDAF Viewpoint(s), Model(s) and / or DM2 Data Group(s) to which this CR pertains.Operational, Capability, System, Service, Project, Standard, Data and Information, All

AV-x, OV-x, CV-x, SV-x, SvcV-x, StdV-x, PV-x, DIV-x

Performer, Resource Flow, Services, Capabilities

Measures, Locations, Rules, Foundation (IDEAS), Pedigree, Metadata, Reification, Information and Data

LOEEstimated Level of Effort to resolveHigh, Medium, LowPriorityFAC and Working Group priority for resolution of CRHigh, Medium, Low.Core Process CategoryCore process(es) that requires the requested change or that is potentially impacted by the CR.CPM, DAS, JCIDS, OPS, PPBE, SE.Description of Core Process RequirementThe description of need or impact on the core process(es) cited in the Core Process field.TextStatusState of the CR in the CM processConsult IDEAS Group: If the CR involves the IDEAS Foundation, it is statused as “Consult IDEAS Group”. The Actionee(s) are set to the IDEAS Group US representative(s) and the Priority, LOE, and Action are updated with notes from the WG discussion as to what the Actionee(s) should address with the IDEAS Group. This CR now becomes a CR that will not be re-statused until the IDEAS Group has been consulted and the CR issue has been addressed by the IDEAS Group.

Defer: The CR can become a “defer” CR if the solution is too difficult, costly, time consuming. This could include decision to defer action until after next baseline release. The CR can also be deferred because it is not high priority, is not resourceable, or schedule is inadequate to solve, its Status also becomes “Defer”. Notes as to rationale may be added to the Action field in the CRT. Priority and LOE may also be updated.

In Progress for 2.xx+.01: If the CR is deemed desirable for the next baseline release, the Status becomes “In Progress for 2.xx+.01”, a preliminary Action is recorded in the CR database (DB), Actionee(s) are assigned, Priority is assigned, and an LOE is estimated. The CR will be re-statused at a future DoDAF-DM2 WG when the Actionee(s) have had time to research the CR and devise possible solutions and when In-Progress statusing becomes an agenda item.

Rejected: If the requested CR is not accepted or deemed “unactionable” by DoDAF /DM2 WG, its Status becomes “Rejected”. This includes any CR found to be incorrect, out of scope, or suboptimal. In addition the CI change date and WG Approved Date will be updated with the same date as the Action Update Date.

No Change Required: If the CR is determined to require no changes to the DoDAF or DM2, its Status becomes “No Change Required.” In addition the CI change date and WG Approved Date will be updated with the same date as the Action Update Date.

OBE: Although very unlikely for new CR, Previous CRs and/or CI from the CR and/or another CR has eliminated the need for this CR. In addition the CI change date and WG Approved Date will be updated with the same date as the Action Update Date.

In Ver 2.xx: If the CR is considered completed, its Status becomes “in Ver 2.xx”. A rationale is recorded in the Action field in the CRT and the WG Approve Date is also updated.

Unassigned: New ones that are pending WG initial review and determination of course of action and actionee.ActionDuring resolution, this is the action(s) the WG determines need to be taken, the Course of Action (CoA) to be taken. Upon satisfactory completion, this is the record of what was changed.TextAction Update DateThe date of the latest action update.dd mmm yyyyActionee(s)Who is assigned the action.CI Change DateDate(s) changes were made by the actionee(s) and reviewed by the WG.dd mmm yyyyApplicable CI Business RulesCI business rule(s) that need to be adhered to in the resolution of the CR..From the Rule Name column of Table 5-.Business Rule AdherenceThe CRs relationship with the adherence of a business rule.No, YesWG Approve DateThe date the Working Group approves a CR.dd mmm yyyyCSAR

A CSAR is provided to the FAC by the WG every month. The contents are:

Purpose - This document summarizes the DoDAF-DM2 Working Group activities and status of DoDAF-DM2 Change Requests (CR).
Summary of the DoDAF-DM2 Working Group activity for the reporting period - To keep the FAC apprised of the Working Group meetings, agendas are listed as well as the attendance sheet and a complete list of the Working Group members.
DoDAF-DM2 Change Request (CR) Status - This section shows the CR status summary for the current and prior reporting period. The CR tracker fields and field codes are defined in Table 6-.

The Version Description Document is published along with the new release. The purpose of this document is to describe changes made in the new version. It includes a summary of the DoDAF - DM2 change requests and their status. Of those, the ones that have been resolved are listed in a summary of improvements.

Glossary and Terms

AccreditationAn official determination by management that an M&S is acceptable for a specific purpose. [PAM 5-11]Activity ModelProvides a framework for identifying, defining, and organizing the functional strategies, functional rules, and processes needed to manage and support the way an organization does or wants to do business--provides a graphical and textual framework for organizing the data and processes into manageable groups to facilitate their shared use and control throughout the organization. [DOD 5000.11-M]Application The system or problem to which a computer is applied. Reference is often made to an application as being of the computational type, wherein arithmetic computations predominate, or of the data processing type, wherein data handling operations predominate. [DoD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms]ArchitectingThe process of developing architecture.ArchitectureThe structure of components, their interrelationships, and the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution over time. [TOGAF]ASRG DoDAF-DM2 Change Request (CR)The formal mechanism to be used to configuration manage the architecture CI’s. The CR will be the document used to, (1) initiate a major change to a CI, and (2) request specific changes to CIs. Approved CRs are the main products of the ASRG.Archived informationInformation that has been retained for historical purposes that can be retrieved and is usable over the time designated for retention. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 Draft]AuditAn independent examination of a work product or set of work products to assess compliance with specifications, standards, contractual agreements, or criteria. [CMU/SEI-93-TR-25, IEEE-STD-610]BaselineA configuration identification document or set of such documents formally designated and fixed at a specific time during the configuration item’s (CI’s) life cycle. Baselines, plus approved changes from those baselines, constitute the current configuration identification.Configuration(1) The product attributes of an existing or planned product, or a combination of products; (2) one of a series of sequentially created variations of a product. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Configuration auditThe CM Function that reviews processes and products to validate compliance with requirements, and to verify that products have achieved their required attributes and conform to released product definition information. (I.e., (1) The review of procedures, processes, and systems for compliance and consistency. (2) Examination to determine if a product conforms to its product definition information. (3) Assessment of performance requirements to observed and measured information.) Note: These audits are sometimes divided into separate functional and physical configuration audits. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Configuration baseline Identifies and declares the attributes of a product at a point in time, which serves as reference for activities throughout its life cycle. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Configuration changeAn alteration to a product and its product configuration information [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Configuration change managementThe CM function that ensures changes to a configuration baseline are properly identified, recorded, evaluated, approved, incorporated, and verified. (2) The CM process concerning the systematic proposal, justification, evaluation, coordination, and disposition of proposed configuration changes; and the implementation of all approved and released configuration changes into (a) the applicable configurations of a product, (b) associated product configuration information, and (c) supporting and interfacing products and their associated product information. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Configuration ControlThe systematic proposal, justification, evaluation, coordination, and approval or disapproval of proposed changes, and the implementation of all approved changes in the configuration of a CI after establishment of the baseline(s) for the CI. [MIL-STD-973]Configuration IdentificationThe selection of CI's; the determination of the types of configuration documentation required for each CI; the issuance of numbers and other identifiers affixed to the CI's and to the technical documentation that defines the CI's configuration, including internal and external interfaces; the release of CI's and associated configuration documentation; the functional and physical characteristics, and the establishment of configuration baselines for CI's. [MIL-STD-973]Configuration ItemAn aggregation of important information or data on a component that Is designated for configuration management and treated as a single entity in the configuration management process. This definition includes all information of importance to the management of the design process and development of the CI. CIs include intermediate in-work/draft products and not just final products and, as such, change according to the specific work in progress.Configuration management (CM)A process that establishes and maintains consistency of a product with its requirements and configuration information throughout its life cycle. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Configuration status accounting (CSA)The CM function managing the capture, storage, retrieval, and access of product configuration information necessary to account for the configuration of a product. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Configuration verificationThe CM function verifying that a product has achieved consistency and accuracy of its product requirements, and product configuration information/data. The representation of facts, numbers, or datum of any nature that can be communicated/stored, and processed to form information. See Information. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]EffectivityA designation defining the product range (e.g., serial, lot numbers, model, dates) or event at which a change to a specific product is to be (or has been) effected, or to which a variance applies. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Engineering Change Proposal (ECP)A proposed engineering change and the documentation by which the change is described, justified, and submitted to the Government for approval or disapproval. [MIL-STD-973] Appendix D of MIL-STD-973 provides the format and preparation instructions for an ECP.Group identifierAn alphanumeric identifier that (1) uniquely identifies a group of like units of the same product which are manufactured or assembled under uniform conditions, and are expected to function in a consistent manner (e.g. lot). (2) Is used to uniquely designate a specific volumetric quantity (batch) of a material (usually a chemical mixture) created at the same time and expected to have properties similar to, but not necessarily the same as other batches created at other times. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]InterchangeableA product that is capable of being exchanged with another product, which has equivalent or similar product, attributes without alteration of the products themselves, or of adjoining products, except for adjustment. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]InterfaceThe product attributes that exist at a common boundary of two or more products. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Interface controlThe process of identifying, recording, and managing product attributes to the common boundary interfacing of two or more products provided by one or more organizations. Interface information is recorded information (e.g. interface control drawing) that depicts product attributes of an interface between related or co-functioning products. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Life cycleA generic term for the entire life of a product from concept to disposal. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Nomenclature(1) Names assigned to kinds and groups of products, (2) formal designations assigned to products by customer or supplier (e.g., model number or model type, design differentiation, specific design series or configuration). [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Operational configurationThe ‘state’ (i.e., on/off, open/closed, operating / not operating) of products, systems, or components at a particular point in time. The actual operational configuration will vary depending on overall product status and condition. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Operational informationInformation that supports the use of a product (e.g., operation, maintenance, and user’s manuals/instructions, procedures, and diagrams). [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE)The process for justifying, acquiring, allocating, and tracking resources in support of DoD missions. [http://acc.dau.mil]Product attribute(s)Performance, functional, and physical characteristic(s) of a product--product configuration information. Information about a product in support of its life cycle phases. This includes product definition and supplementary types of information e.g., operating procedures, maintenance procedures, disposal methods) necessary to support all phases of the product’s life cycle. However, it does not consist of project or administrative types of information (e.g. cost, schedule, and planning etc. Update alias table [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Product definition informationTechnical design definition information that defines product attributes and is the authoritative source for configuration definition. (E.g., specifications, drawings, source code) Other types of information are derived from the product definition information to develop the product configuration information (e.g., operating procedures, maintenance procedures, disposal methods) necessary to support the product. Update alias table [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Product identifierA name or alphanumeric identifier, unique to the issuing organization, used to designate parts, assemblies, or products of the same configuration, and to differentiate them from other products. Note: These identifiers may include a supplementary identifier used to distinguish one of several sequentially created configurations of a product from the previous configuration of the same product (i.e. revision or version). [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]ReleaseDissemination or distribution of information and/or products after approval and is subject to configuration change management. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]RetrofitThe incorporation of new design parts, or software code, resulting from an approved configuration change, into products already delivered. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 Draft]SpecificationInformation that explicitly states the essential technical attributes for a product/unit:)One of a quantity of items (e.g., products, parts); identifier of measure [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]ValidationConfirmation that the requirements for a specific intended use or application have been fulfilled [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]VarianceAn approved departure from a specified requirement(s). Note: A variance does not require a corresponding revision to current approved product definition information. It may be temporary, permanent, or for a specific use. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]VerificationConfirmation that the produce has fulfilled specific requirements. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 Draft]VersionA particular form of product that varies from other forms of the product. [ANSI/EIA 649, 12/3/2001 draft]Acronyms

ACPArchitecture Certification PackageCRAction ItemANSIAmerican National Standards InstituteARCHArchitectureASDAssistant Secretary of DefenseASRGArchitecture Standards and Review GroupAT&LAcquisition, Technology and LogisticsCDMConceptual Data ModelC2Command and ControlC4Command, Control, Communications and ComputersCIConfiguration ItemCIOChief Information OfficerCMConfiguration ManagementCMBConfiguration Management BoardCMPConfiguration Management PlanActionCourse of ActionCOICommunity of InterestCPMCapabilities Portfolio ManagementCRChange RequestCSARConfiguration Status Accounting ReportDARSDoD Architecture Registry SystemDASDefense Acquisition SystemDBDatabaseDDMSDoD Discovery Metadata SpecificationDISADefense Information Systems AgencyDM2DoDAF Meta ModelDNIDirector of National IntelligenceDoDDepartment of DefenseDoD CIODepartment of Defense Chief Information OfficerDoD MWGDoD Metadata Working GroupDoDAFDoD Architecture FrameworkDODDDepartment of Defense DirectiveDODIDepartment of Defense InstructionEAEnterprise ArchitectureEGBEnterprise Governance BoardEIAElectronic Industries AllianceFACFederated Architecture CommitteeFCMFunctional Configuration ManagerGEIAGovernment Electronics and Information AssociationGIGGlobal Information GridGTG CBMGIG Technical Guidance Configuration Management BoardIAWIn Accordance WithIDEASInternational Defense Enterprise Architecture SpecificationIEAInformation Enterprise ArchitectureIEEEInstitute of Electrical and Electronics EngineersISOInternational Organization for StandardsITInformation TechnologyITSCInformation Technology Standards CommitteeJCIDSJoint Capabilities Integration and DevelopmentLDMLogical Data ModelLOELevel of EffortMDRMeta Data RegistryMILMilitaryNGONon-Governmental Organization NIINetworks and Information IntegrationOASDOffice of the Assistant Secretary of DefenseOASISOrganization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards OMGObject Management GroupOWLWeb Ontology LanguagePESPhysical Exchange SpecificationPOA&MPlan of Action and MilestonesPPBEPlanning, Programming, Budgeting, and ExecutionQAQuality AssuranceRDBMSRelational Data Base Management SystemSESystems EngineeringTWGTechnical Working GroupUCOREUniversal COREUSDUnder Secretary of DefenseVDDVersion Description DocumentWGWorking Group

S.E.O for Dummies

2013-06-06T06:05:00.001-07:00

This post are view points on SEO from the article 17 SEO Myths That You Should leave behind.
It is a pdf. file

Myth #`1 I must submit my site to Google

MYTH #1 Google is the most popular search engine. It is obvious then that would be the only place to submit your site. There are plenty of other good search engines too. There are : yahoo, dogpile to name a few.

Myth #2 SEO is all about ranking

I have no problem with Myth #2. It makes sense to me. Why you ask ? When you think SEO what do you think about ? You think ranking. Thus, the myth is born. SEO is more than ranking. It is about choosing a good strategy to give you good hits. I asked my cousin who is VP of Prestipresse and asked with what came to mind about SEO. He said, “keywords” Here is what SEO is all about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_optimization

Myth # 3 We must rank number one.

Myth # 3 more or less make sense to me. I believe it takes more than just high rankings to make a lot of money. Personally ,I am set fairly high in the rankings and I am NOT making any money. I know someone who is number 1 in the rankings for a long time and they aren't making any money either from being in the from the writings. The idea here is you are number one then you will make much money from which comes from many hits. This is a myth. Being number one in the rankings will not increase your bottom line. I have spoken to some business execs and asked them that. One told me, it was important for them to be number one, but it did not increase their profits. Being number one will make it easier for people to find you. For instance, Andion is number one in the ranks. I signed up for a meeting. 40 signed up on the facebook page and four showed up at their makeshift office. This shows that rnakings can be decieving. To increase your bottom line [1] have a solid client base with customers that love you [2] get yourself ranked number 1

Myth #4 SEO is something I can handed off

Myth #4 is kind of fuzzy with me. It is the problem that software is very expensive. Unbelievable it would give you a very good start you would not have to hand off your projects to a technical team what's a 50 percent of it. technical dealing with all the different files. there is get some rope and I could help you help with it

Myth #5 More links are better than content

Myth # 5 needs a little bit of explanation. Use links to backup your content. Use links like a bibliography and footnotes show you that your contacts as a solid base is in fact add is supported by others. Conversely, if you have more links than good content, people will say you aren't original and possibly disregard your service or product or what you have to say.

Myth #6 Content Trumps SEO

Good content will help you only so much. Use every single tool you can come across to boost your ratings. Analyse your traffic. Get good ratings from your clientelle. A good app for this yelp.ca

Myth #7 Social Media and SEO are not related

They are kissing cousins. For instance, hash tags in twitter are SEO

Myth #8 On Page SEO Is All I Need To Rank

I would state this is about the truth. You need to learn to all your tools in order to to get high in the ratings.This will take specific software to do it.

Myth #9 Keyword Need to be exact

Put in enough keywords to your article noticed .

Myth #10 There Is An Ideal Keyword Density For My Page

There is no ideal number. It is all probability.

The rest will be done at some other point in time.

A hand kids past a misplaced believer

2012-11-03T08:24:00.001-07:00

A hand kids past a misplaced believer

The USA has turned one step closer into Nazi Germany

2012-05-11T06:33:00.001-07:00

Is the U.S government so weak, that it has to pass HR 37 ? If you see the brasschecktv.com video;it seems to be the case. It can't allow for any analysis or dissent of its policies in verbal form. On the other hand, it does bring interesting possiblities. One possiblity that a massive rally by Americans all throughout the land, stand up against this B.S.

Free Speech is now a felony

As Congressional representatives overwhelming approved the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act in February of this year, few Americans were paying attention. When President Obama signed the Act into law, he did so in secret, without any of the fanfare that came with his signing of universal health care two years prior – and for good reason. This is one of those laws the government doesn’t want you to know exists until it’s too late to do anything about it.

For many, awareness of the existence of the new law will only become apparent when they are arrested and charged under new Federal trespassing guidelines as they attempt to protest, display signs or disrupt any person or event of national significance. An event of national significance is any activity where Secret Service agents are responsible for security. With several thousand agents in the field at any given time, events involving the President, Congressional members, staff or individuals running for Federal office are all fair game.

Simply standing with a bullhorn, holding up a sign, promoting a contentious message or even being on the grounds of a Secret Service secured event will now make it possible for the government to detain, arrest and charge those involved in these “disruptions” (even if you just happen to be passing through) with a felonious criminal act.

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/10524.html

Mailboxixchange Review

2011-02-24T08:54:00.001-08:00

Introduction

My first impression of Mailboxixchange.com is a good one. This is a high class website. It’s design is quite pleasing. I like the flash video. Mailboxixchanges’s product line is quite impressive. The information they give each class of mailboxes is extensive. You know exactly what you are getting. I will be reviewing wall mount, single and commercial mailboxes. The opinions expressed here are my own. I have never used their products. Whatever section of this site you go to is highly informative. Whatever mailbox you decide to choose comes with many options. The more decorative or specialist ones will be more expensive. If I need a mailbox and lived in the US I would order from them.

Wall Mount Mailbox

They have 898 wall mount mailboxes. The one on the main page looks rustic. This particular page has many beautiful mailboxes. The price ranges from $52-$1150 The mailboxes in this category in my opinion are a work of art. I like the Bacova Gardens vertical wall mount mailbox shown on this page. It shows a picture of a satisfied cat on it. The Bacova product line has 18 units.The rest of them show different animals. This section displays metal vertical wall mount mailboxes with animals on them. The two that impressed me the most are the Good Directions Steamer Trunk Copper Mailboxes. This mailbox cost $200. I thought it was made of wood .It is made of brass. The other one that impresses me the most is Dea's Garden Chiffon Mailboxes. I thought the sides were made of wood. It is made out or composite materials .

Single-Unit Mailboxes

The mailboxes in this section do not really impress me. The ones that I am partial to are the Colonial Pedestal Locking and the Ecco E8 Victorian Tower Mailboxes. I like these mailboxes because they appeal more artistically to me. The rest of the mailboxes look like standard mailboxes that you would find while walking in a suburb of any city. Prices range from $250-1800.The MailSecure High Security Mailbox System thier most secure single mailbox system. Your mail will be secure if you purchase this mail box. They start at $748-$1250. The shells are made of heavy-duty electro-galvanized steel. You can choose between three finishes:antique gold, black matte and silver highlights.The MailSecure High Security Mailbox System has five different styles.

Commercial Mailboxes

a nice selection of commercial mailboxes. Mailboxes in this range from $74-$1480 There are two styles that catches my eye. One is the CBU:Decorative Cluster Box Mailboxes. These mailboxes are expensive. They are in $1400 range.If you decide to choose the CBU line, there are plenty of accessories for it. They are all decorative. They have two types of roundish pedastals that comes in three types of colors. They also have square column that comes in one color. The top accessory comes in three colors. The other is the Vario EXPRESS Mail Stations. Mailboxixchange.com has trademarked this particular mailbox This product line is between $2523-$3722 Whatever unit you choose comes with several options. There are six colors you can choose. You can add decorative side panels.

Fractals

2010-12-15T12:13:00.001-08:00

I recently purchased Fractals by PomApps. com

This app allows you to change formulas using sliders. It would be nice if you could edit the formula manually
See pic below:

The speed at which the Mandelbrot or Julia sets are drawn are excellent regardless of resolution chosen.

It is obvious from the pic above that you
can save your work. You can save it
the Album or photos.

Colour choosing is easy too.
I give this app an 9/10 .

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Boulevard de Maisonneuve Ouest,Montreal,Canada

DropBox Review

2010-12-04T10:12:00.001-08:00

This little app runs on your iPhone and PC.   It allows you to transfer files to and cabfrom your PC.   This app is incredibly handy for   displaying   graphic files. You can drop your files into folders or the main view.   You can also create your own folders. The plus tab you see in the pic is for   folder creation.
Next I will show you how to share with other people.
Step 1. Drop your files into the Public folder. See pic below:

Step 2. Check your DropBox app on your Windows Menu bar. It should have notified you that a file has uploaded. Go to the Public folder and find your file . Click on the file with left mouse and this menu will appear:

Step 3. In the DropBox menu click on the Copy Public Link option. You will then get your link. The example file is   test.jpg.   Your link will look something like this:
                                  http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3447837/test.jpg
Why is DropBox useful ? You can send pics to people using the DropBox URL and people will able to see it even when your computer is off. The DropBox URL works in most fgrums where photo uploading is allowed.
DropBox is free.

iStatistics

2010-09-25T07:00:00.001-07:00

I found this cool statistics app for the iPhone. It is called iStatistics. It allows you to create your own worksheet, do combinatorics, statistics and probability and linear regression. You can see screen shots at:

http://www.openstackinc.com/iStatistics/iStatisticsScreenshots.html

This app definately makes statistics fun ! The only thing it is missing is the ability to graph data points in the modeling section. It would be nice to see correlation between your data.

Croc Review

2010-08-28T13:04:00.001-07:00

Well I got my first pair of Crocs ;)
This is what they look like:

Call me fashioned challenged, if
you will.
I purchased them for indoor use.
One thing I dislike about the store is that thier shoe racks have no markings. You have to go digging for your size. How hard would it be to markings like. men/women size x/y per rack?
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Rue Sherbrooke Ouest,Westmount,Canada

Croc Question

2010-08-22T05:17:00.001-07:00

How many people out there like the Croc foot wear ? I find some of them interesting. The Crocs Blitzen makes an interesting house slipper. They have some interesting sandals that would be good for the beach and pool

Headphone Amp Comparison (XM5 vs Total AirHead)

2010-08-21T18:47:00.001-07:00

Everyone is probably wondering what the heck is a XM5 ? The XM5 is a headphone amp. Headphones have portable amps. They really improve the sound of any good pair of headphones. This is second headphone amp I purchased. The first amp I owned was the Total AirHead. by HeadRoom. It should be noted these gizmos can get very expensive.

The XM5 cost me $300 US The Total Air Head wad about $175 US.

Here is the review:

Amps: XM5 and the Total AirHead
Player: 4G Nano iPod
Headphones: Beyerdynamic Dt 770 PR0 80 OHM
First my ipod is on full as was XM5. The XM5 in the experiment is on cross feed too.
So I will compare different music.

Rock Music
Jimi Hendrix: Axis Bold As Love:EXP                                                                  Jefferson Starship: Blow Against the Empire : Hiijack
At full blast XM5 0 distortion, it could be a bit louder
Jazz
Miles Runs the Voodo Down
On XM5 at full blast, some distortion. At 50% bass strong volume acceptable
Ambient
Mystical Sun
2012
On the XM5 at full blast some distortion is apparent. At 50%, bass and treble are very good as well as the volume is acceptable.

Pure
On XM5 at full blast- little distortion. At 50% strong bass and good treble at an acceptable volume.
Classical
Mars- The Planets - Conductor Simon Rattle
On the XM5 at full blast I found it wanting.Pushing in the 10+ gain made it better .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AirHead Results
Classical
Mars-The Planets-Conductor Simon Rattle
On the AirHead, I found the volume wanting at full blast
Ambient
Same CD ''s for the XM5 test
I found on the Air Head volume on full -wanting... It was more like a 6 or 7.
Jazz.
Miles Run the Voodo Down
I found the volume wanting.   Though the bass is strong.
Rock
Same CD's as the XM5 test.
Strange enough   the results are similar to the XM5.
Conclusion
I would say the XM5 is better amp than the Air Head.

iPhone 4 update

2010-08-16T16:26:00.001-07:00

Here is the url to video footage I shot of the iPhone 4 in a Rogers boutique. As you see , the network bars did not drop to zero as I held it in the "death grip" in different positions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl5CYXpEFJc

Apple iPhone 4

2010-08-14T12:20:00.000-07:00

I went to Rogers to check out the signal attenuation problem.

I expected signal to drop to zero . I performed the test several times including the key test.

To my amazement, there was no attenuation !

Is it possible Apple produced a defective batch ? If so, there should be a recall and if you
got one, you should get a replacement. I shot a video , but it didn't come out,arrrg .
I will post it at another to prove my case.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Rue Mackay,Montreal,Canada

iPhone/iPad/Kindle Issues

2010-08-05T09:12:00.000-07:00

I own an iPhone. I am thinking of getting an iPad. What bugs me about it is that many of the apps exists for the iPhone also exist for the iPad. Having the same app twice bugs me. It means repurchasing it. More money to spend,yuck. The obvious solution is to delete the iPhone version. Though if I do this I can kiss all my files associaited with the the iPhone version goodbye for certain programs. This is not good and thus the dilemma...

Having no Flash does not bother me too much. The price does bother me since I am not rich. I read on one site that it was described as an ambient electronic device. The author described it like a tv or radio. more than like a laptop computer

Putting Amazon.com Kindle App on it will be a big plus 'cause you can see color on it due to the iPad architechture and a colour Kindle won't be out for a long time.

Dragon-Send E-mail by speaking it

2010-02-17T13:16:00.001-08:00

Dragon is a great application. It is free. It is a speech to text software you do not have to use any typing anymore.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:Rue Crescent,Montreal,Canada

How To Turn Your 3G iPhone into a 3GS

2010-02-13T09:26:00.000-08:00

I have found two apps that turn your iPhone 3G into 3GS

The first app is called VoiceThis.
This app allows you to voice activation for your contact book .

The second app is iVideoPhone.
This app allows you to make
videos with your 3G phone!

So if you are thinkin' of upgrading for these purposes, get these apps instead. The total cost is $2.00 !

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

How Obama Can Redeem Himself In My Eyes

2010-02-01T14:23:00.001-08:00

I hear Obama wants to get tough on bankers.

If Obama can trace how the bailout was used to help the bankers and get detailed documents and if everything checks out then Obama gets two thumbs up from me.
For instance, if he finds the money goes for personal ends,he should file fraud charges against them, or something along those lines.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Shocking but true interview with Bjarne Stroustrup

2010-01-14T05:19:00.000-08:00

I came across this interview on looking for the creation of C++. Reading it blew my mind. It is absolutely hilarious and true. So without further ado go to:IEEE 1998 interview with Bjarne Stroustrup

Creativity Booster Software

2010-01-01T10:23:00.001-08:00

brainstorning tools
These tools can be broken down into several groups:
[1] idea generation
[2] Mind Mapping tools
[3] Other Tools
I have tried a bunch of them over the years. I have even purchased one.
The first catagory of software are the hardest to come by,but are the most useful. They do more than just diagram ideas. One such software is :
Axon Idea processor (http://web.singnet.com.sg)
This is a unique software package. This program can do brainstorming . It can do simulation of networks, logic circuits, waiting queues and any situation than can be modeled. Here is an example of a cargo queue.(see above photo) In this photo, queue is actually running, you can see partial readout in the graph:

There are all sorts of other tools. There is a sequencer, analyser and tabulator tools .You can see the dire. Axon also allows you to do all sorts of mapping. You can see the types of mapping it can do at http://web.singnet.com.sg/~axon2000/showcase.htm
One of the more interesting aspects of this software is that is modeless. This means that you do not have to switch into editing mode if you want to write etc. You work in the Axon space a a seemless whole.
Axon comes in a free version called Axon Lite and a paying Version. The Lite version is a limitted version of the paying version
I will discuss mind mapping tools   There are a plethora of them out there. The ones I will look at are :
[1] SimpleMind
[2] Personal Brain
[3]   MindJet Manage
Simple Mind is a brainstorming tool for the,iphone and PC.   I have SimpleMindX. It is basically a diagramming tool. It 's main advantage is if you purchase it for $8 you can transfer you mindmaps to the desktop version. SimpleMindX is the free version. Here is a mindmap I made with SimpleMindX :

You can see what SimpleMind for the PC looks like at http://www.simpleapps.eu/simplemind/desktop
Personal Brain is a Windows program. It is much slicker than Simple Mind. There is a time limitted trial of 30 days. The version you get is the PRO. I am playing around with the trial version. Creating mind maps in this software is snap. There are couple of really neat feautures in this software. The first feature is called Wander. This feature will animate your mindmap and move through all the nodes and the child nodes. The next feature I like is called a jump node. These are nodes don't fit into the main map but nonetheless are important There are many other neat features. The PRO version is $250. The Core version is $150
MindJet Manager is a windows program. I find the interface confusing to use. I have seen this interface in a web editor by Trillian. For a web-editor it is ok, but not for mind-mapping software. It has the usual features of mind mapping software like allowing you to colapse,expand maps. You can connect maps to databases. One thing I do like is the ease of connecting links to nodes. It also comes with many templates which is nice. I created a screen shot of Mindjet manger with non-descript mindmap mad from the templates:

iThoughts is for iPhone. I don't own it yet,but it looks like the best of the mindmapping tool for the iPhone You can see screenshots of it at http://www.ithoughts.co.uk/iThoughts/Screenshots.html
The last item I will discuss is the Creative Whack Pack. It has now come out for the iphone. I used to have the deck and I have read Whack on the Right Side of your head. Here is what it more or less looks like I love the Whack of the Day option, You can email it to a friend or post it to twitter, or but it on Facebook. Each card comes it own sound effect.

Here we go ‘round the Obama-‘Bush….

2009-12-30T06:33:00.001-08:00

I just read the story that President Obama is going to give Iran 10 months shape up or thier nuclear policy or he will start to sanction them. This sounds like a rehash of what President Bush did with Iraq. If sanctions have as little effect as they did on Iraq, is the US going to invade Iran ? Looks like history is going to repeat itself again…
Here is the story .:As standoff with Iran continues, U.S. prepares targeted sanctions

Mushrooms and & the Origin of Christmas

2009-12-29T08:28:00.001-08:00

Summary: Here is an excellent series of talks on the origin of Christianity .

The lecture is in seven parts.

Denver August 2010 ET ballot initiative places next step in extraterrestrial disclosure on voters

2009-12-23T08:06:00.001-08:00

Here is a summary of the story:

Reached for comment by this reporter, Eric M. Brown, communications director for Denver’s Mayor John W. Hickenlooper, stated “We respect the process we have for citizens to put initiatives on the ballot and let voters decide whether to approve them.”

You can red the whole story here:Denver August 2010 ET Ballot

Commentary: Finallly some positive action is being taken.

Why Politicians are Public Enemy No. 1

2009-12-14T14:00:00.000-08:00

“Thus , for the first time in the history of man, we have known for a little over a decade that there can be enough to go around and that we are frustrated from realising this epochal potential because of the one hundred or som political sovereignities which were set up for mutually-exclusive survival hopes under the Malthusian dictum”, pg 246 Utopia or Oblivion, B. Fuller

This was written in 1967. Today this quote is even more relevant than it was then, since we have better technology. Since we have better technology and distribution nets we can theoritcally and practically feed more people.Now Bucky mentions Malthus and his equation. Anybody remember the equation? I do. Here is the equation and its solution;

The equation is basically of expontential growth without limits. It is used to model bacteria in biology. Malthus used it to model economic growth. The main idea there is not enough resources for an expanding population, so there will be haves and have nots. The Malthusian equation is an extremely inaccurate model for predicting the future and yet politicians to this day rely on it If they know the logistic law equation then shame on them for not putting it to use. One of form the logistic equation is:

For more info on logistic equations see:http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LogisticEquation.html

To continue on …

“Let us now consider what would happen if we were to take all the industrial machinery away from all the industrial countries around the earth. This means pulling down all the wires, taking up all the tracks, removing all dynamos, and every motor, We take away all industrial equipment away from all countries in Europe,. We take it away from Russia, We take it away all the industrial machinery from China and Japan. We take it away from the United States and Canada. dump all the worlds industrialization into ocean. Within six months , two billion human beings will starve to death , suffered greatly along the way.

Now I am going to give you another picture. I am going to leave all the industrial machinery where it is….Next we are going to take away from all the countries of the earth all politicians, all the different political ideologies and the political party workers and evey kind. and we are going to send them all of for a trip around the sun As long as the politicians are absent , everybody on earth has been eating is going to keep right on eating, and with all political barriers down the prospects of arranging to take care of the needs the rest will accelerate, and humanity everywhere on earth will prosper”, pg 247, Utopia or Oblivion

I think these statements are so obvious, The second quote is obvious. Politicians can blather on all they want ,without technology many people would starve. The second statement isn’t that much harder to prove. Let’s take wars. Wars are based on two reasons, religion and politics. In the past, both of these landed being the same.For the purpose of argument. we will deal with politics. If they are no politicians you can’t raise an army. How about terrorists ? Terrorists are politicians too. They have an agenda and usually implement it by force. The difference being terrorists don’t work for a government. Terrorists/freedom fighters work alone.

Lastly why don’t people get rid of government ? One reason being people are afraid to live alone . They don’t want to have to take of eveything. Another reason is people like government services… All this will be explored in another posting

Nameless Arte

An Interview with a man from the dark side

Net-Ops :Another Supposedly leaked document

Leaked D.O.D document

Introduction

Purpose

Purposes of the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF)

Purposes of the DoDAF Meta Model (DM2)

Purposes of DoDAF-DM2 Configuration Management (CM)

Scope

Definitions

Applicable Documents

Configuration Identification

Organizational Roles, Responsibilities, and Interactions

Architecture and Standards Review Group (ASRG)

Federated Architecture Committee (FAC)

DoDAF-DM2 WG

DoDAF-DM2 WG Roles

DoDAF-DM2 CM Processes and Procedures

CR Processing and Configuration Status Reporting

Maintain Membership

Enter New CRs

Prepare Agenda and Readaheads

Conduct WG Meeting

Update CR Status

Research Topic

Maintain Working Group Collaboration Site

Implement Directed Solution.

Conduct Ad Hoc WG Sessions

Report to FAC

DoDAF Specific Processing

DM2 Specific Processing

Baseline Process

Announce to WG technical cutoff meeting

Conduct technical cutoff meeting

Reporting to FAC During Baseline Cutoff

Prepare baseline review documentation

Adjudication of Component Comments

Perform Baseline Production and QA

Provide Recommendation to ASRG

Publish New Baseline

DoDAF-DM2 CM Business Rules

CR Tracker (CRT)

VDD

Glossary and Terms

S.E.O for Dummies

A hand kids past a misplaced believer

The USA has turned one step closer into Nazi Germany

Free Speech is now a felony

Mailboxixchange Review

Fractals

DropBox Review

iStatistics

Croc Review

Croc Question

Headphone Amp Comparison (XM5 vs Total AirHead)

iPhone 4 update

Apple iPhone 4

iPhone/iPad/Kindle Issues

Dragon-Send E-mail by speaking it

How To Turn Your 3G iPhone into a 3GS

How Obama Can Redeem Himself In My Eyes

Shocking but true interview with Bjarne Stroustrup

Creativity Booster Software

Here we go ‘round the Obama-‘Bush….

Mushrooms and & the Origin of Christmas

Denver August 2010 ET ballot initiative places next step in extraterrestrial disclosure on voters

Why Politicians are Public Enemy No. 1