report pf drdl
Post on 28-Apr-2015
33 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
PROCESS BASED APPROACH FOR DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT OF MISSION CONTROL SOFTWAREA Project report
submitted in the partial fulfilment ofthe requirements for the award of the degree of
Bachelor of Technology
In
Information Technology
Submitted by
MARUVADA LAKSHMI PRIYANKA
(09KD1A1225)
Under the esteemed guidance of
K.RAJASEKHARAMHEAD,IV&V DRDL HYDERABAD
LENDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (Approved by AICTE. Affiliated to JNTUK.) Jonnada, Vizianagaram-535005.
1
2009-2013
CONTENTS
1. ABOUT THE ORGANISATION
1.1 History 3
1.2Projects 4
2. SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGIES
2.1Corporate Methodologies 9
2.1.1. Spiral Vs Incremental 9
2.2Ground System Design
2.2.1. General 10
2.2.2. Automation 12
2.3 Enhancement Methodologies
2.3.1. Characteristics of Agile Methodologies 14
2.3.2. Implementation of Agile Process in S/W Organisations 18
2.4 Onboard Computer System Design
2.4.1 DSP vs. General Purpose CPUs 24
2.4.2. Missile guidance for onboard systems 24
3. TESTING AND QUALITY ASURANCE 30
4. CASE STUDY ON AIR DEFENSE
4.1. Health Care 32
4.2. Communications 34
2
5.REFERENCES 36
1. About the Organisation:
1.1History:
Realizing the importance of guided missile weapon systems in the modern warfare, a
Special Weapon Development Team (SWDT) was formed in 1958. This team was later
expanded into DRDL, a full-fledged laboratory in June 1961 at the campus of Defence
Science Centre, Delhi. The laboratory was moved to Hyderabad in Feb' 1962, from where
starts the story of guided missiles in India.
Realizing the importance of guided missile weapon systems in the modern warfare, a
Special Weapon Development Team (SWDT) was formed in 1958. This team was later
expanded into DRDL, a full-fledged laboratory in June 1961 at the campus of Defence
Science Centre, Delhi. The laboratory was moved to Hyderabad in Feb' 1962, from where
starts the story of guided missiles in India.
During the initial phase, the laboratory successfully developed an anti tank missile system
and indigenous rockets and proved them through flight trials. IBM 1620 was installed in
DRDL as early as in 1965, which was used, for flight simulation studies.
In 1972, Project Devil, a medium range Surface-to-Surface Missile was initiated. A large
number of infrastructure and test facilities were established during this period. The main
facilities established during this period included Aerodynamic, Structural and
Environmental test facilities, Liquid and Solid propulsion facilities; fabrication and
engineering facilities; Control, Guidance, FRP, Rubber and computer centers, ground and
flight instrumentation and onboard power supplies development facilities. The
development of components / systems for Project Devil formed the technology bricks for
the future IGMDP Programme.
1982 onwards DRDL took a quantum jump by taking design and development of various
types of missiles systems simultaneously leading them to limited series production under
Integrated Guided Missiles Development Programme (IGMDP). Prithvi- a surface to
surface missile system, Trishul- a quick reaction short range, surface to air missile
3
system, Nag- a third generation anti tank missile system and Akash- a medium range,
surface to air missile system, besides Agni- a technology demonstrator were taken up
under the Programme.
In order to meet the growing demands of development, integration, testing and quality
assurance, three establishments namely Research Center Imarat (RCI), Composite
Products Development Centre (CPDC), and Interim Test Range (ITR) came out under the
parenthood of DRDL and a separate qualification agency Missile Systems Quality
Assurance Agency (MSQAA) were established during this period. Later these
establishments acquired independent status. In the year 1999 another laboratory called
'Advanced System Laboratory' was carved out of DRDL to meet the specific
requirements of long range systems. This group of laboratories is now called Missile
Complex.
Today DRDL, along with other Missile Complex Laboratories is the pioneer Missile
Research Institutes in the country.
1.2 PROJECTS:
AKASH :
The supersonic surface to air missile ‘AKASH’ has a range of about 25Km and carries
fragmentation warhead which is triggered by radio proximity fuse. The missile uses state-
of-technology integral ramjet rocket propulsion system and the onboard digital autopilot
ensures stability and maneuvers. The multi function phased array radar tracks the targets
and guides missiles towards them. The weapon system has a network of radar sensors to
effectively manage the air threats.
Salient Features
Multidirectional, Multitarget Engagement
Fully automated operation
4
Targets – Fighter A/C, UAV, Helicopter, Cruise Missile
All Terrain mobility
All weather operation
Advanced ECCM
Custom configured to meet user requirements
NAG (Third Generation Anti-Tank Missile)
Third generation Anti-Tank Missile System ‘NAG’ has “fire and forget” and “top attack”
capabilities. The Lock-on-before Launch Imaging Infra Red (IIR) homing provides
capability for Day & Night operation. The Missile excels as a formidable support weapon
for the Mechanised Infantry and Attack Helicopter formations. The Imaging Infra Red
homing seeker has all-weather day and night capability.
The Nag system is for deployment on “NAMICA”, A tracked vehicle and on a
Helicopter. Top attack mode using the advanced homing guidance system and tandem
shaped charge warhead is used to defeat heaviest armour. In addition, high energy,
smokeless propellant, light weight, high strength composite airframe with foldable wings
and fins, onboard real-time processor with fast and efficient algorithms, compact sensor
package and electric actuation system, digital autopilot and high immunity to counter
measures make this missile a state-of-art Anti-Tank Guided Missile System.
Salient Features
RANGE-4.0Km
Fire & Force capability in lock-on-before-launch mode
“Day & Night operation (imaging infrared seeker)
5
‘Top-Attack’ capability
High SSKP (Single Shot Kill Probability
Capability to defeat future tic tanks & other hard target
NAMICA:
Salient Features
8 Nos. Ready-to-fire missiles on the turret
Option for additional 4 missiles in storage
4 missiles can be fired in 1 minute
Mobility matching BMF-11
ASTRA:
ASTRA is a Beyond Visual Range (BVR) air to air missile indigenously designed and
developed to engage and destroy highly maneuvering supersonic aerial targets. This
highly agile and accurate missile can intercept high speed, highly maneuvering targets
and can pull High level maneuvers. The kill boundary of this vehicle gives the enemy no
chance of survival. This is one of its class with a low all up weight to have high launch
6
range capability, this weapon system is meant for platforms like SU 30MKI, Mirage 2000
of Indian Air force and LCA developed by DRDO.
Salient Features
Airborne Launcher adaptable to Different Fighter Aircrafts
Smokeless Propulsion
Inertial Mid-Course & Terminal Homing
State-of-art ECCM features
All weather capability
Launch Speed 0.4M to 2M
Launch Altitude SL to 20Km
Launch Range 80Km
PJ-10:
BrahMos is a Supersonic Cruise Missile System developed by DRDL with foreign
collaboration. DRDO's share of the work is being executed under the Programme PJ10.
Salient Features:
Integral Booster & High Performance Ramjet System
Fuel based Actuation System
Nose Cap Control Thrusters
Inertial Navigation System
Active Radar Seeker
7
HELINA (Helicoptor launched Anti tank Missile):
A variant of NAG Missile to be launched from Helicopter is being developed under the
Project named HELINA. The missile will have a range of 7 Km with all other features
similar to NAG Missile system.
HSTDV (Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle)
Mission:
Project HSTDV is a technology demonstrator aimed to demonstrate autonomous Flight of
a Scramjet Integrated Vehicle using kerosene. The related technologies are new not only
for India but for the entire aerospace community in the world and have potential
applications in the areas of civil, military and space sectors.
A demonstrator flight vehicle has been conceptualise to demonstrate the Scramjet
technology for a short duration of about 20 seconds.
Mach No 6.5
Altitude 32.5 KM
Flight duration of cruise vehicle 20 seconds
8
2.Software Development Methodologies:
Spiral - Iterative Model:
It is an Iterative model that uses the systematic and formal approaches of the
linear model. The idea of minimizing risks by the use of prototype and other
means is the concept underlying the spiral model. After each iteration, the
different aspects like risk and the number of iterations to be completed are
adjusted.
A spiral model is divided into a number of framework activities also called
as Task Regions. Typically there are between three to six task regions – Customer
Communication, Planning, Risk Analysis, Engineering, Construction and
Release, Customer Evaluation. Each of the regions is populated by a set of work
tasks called a task set that is adapted to the characteristics of the project. As the
evolutionary process begins the team moves around the spiral in a clockwise
direction beginning at the center. The first circuit around the spiral might result in
the development of specifications; subsequent passes around the spiral might be
used to develop a prototype and then progressively more sophisticated versions of
the software. Each pass through the planning region results in adjustments to the
project plan
9
This model can be applied to small and large projects with more complex
comprehensive and numerous tasks. It may be difficult to convince the customers
that the development process is controllable. Also its success relies heavily on the
success of the risk analysis expertise used. This model is particularly well suited
to the development of object-oriented system.
2.1 Corporate (Spiral Vs Incremental):
The spiral model, also known as the spiral lifecycle model, is a systems development
lifecycle (SDLC ) model used in information technology (IT). This model of development
combines the features of the prototyping model and the waterfall model . The spiral
model is favoured for large, expensive, and complicated projects.
The steps in the spiral model can be generalized as follows:
The new system requirements are defined in as much detail as possible.
This usually involves interviewing a number of users representing all the
external or internal users and other aspects of the existing system.
A preliminary design is created for the new system.
A first prototype of the new system is constructed from the preliminary
design. This is usually a scaled-down system, and represents an
approximation of the characteristics of the final product.
A second prototype is evolved by a fourfold procedure: (1) evaluating the
first prototype in terms of its strengths, weaknesses, and risks; (2) defining
the requirements of the second prototype; (3) planning and designing the
second prototype; (4) constructing and testing the second prototype.
At the customer's option, the entire project can be aborted if the risk is
deemed too great. Risk factors might involve development cost overruns,
operating-cost miscalculation, or any other factor that could, in the
customer's judgment, result in a less-than-satisfactory final product.
The existing prototype is evaluated in the same manner as was the previous
prototype, and, if necessary, another prototype is developed from it
according to the fourfold procedure outlined above.
The preceding steps are iterated until the customer is satisfied that the
refined prototype represents the final product desired.
The final system is constructed, based on the refined prototype.10
2.2Ground System Design:
2.2.1General:
Consider providing on-line organized access to all mission telemetry that makes it
extremely easy and convenient to perform any on-demand science or engineering
investigation. With today’s computer technology and the decreasing prices for
storage media, this strategy may well provide an excellent return on investment
interms of data analysis and results. A trending product like ITPS could provide
thiscapability.
Choose fast, reliable, flexible, open-ended, fault-tolerant, and proven data storage
systems whose capacity can be upgraded to handle a great deal more data than the
mission originally may envision.
Maximize the use of technologies like Redundant Array of Independent
Disks(RAID) that promote reliability and minimize downtime. Mission critical
hardware and software (e.g. command system) should have hot backups or other
technologies that promote reliability and minimize downtime. All ground systems
should be configured to simplify backup procedures by using centralized data
storage. Data storage systems should be configured to provide maximum data
protection against disk failures.
Use a highly robust operating system (OS) that is reliable, powerful, flexible, and
customizable. (e.g., Red hat Linux, Mac OS X). An OS that provides shell
scripting capabilities allows all personnel—not only programmers—to implement
incremental, yet potentially significant, improvements across all areas of a project
in a rapid-response fashion. The downsides that may be experienced with this
approach are a need for more sophisticated user training and requiring more
knowledgeable system administrators. In addition, strict adherence to established
CM processes must still be enforced! (This really isn’t a downside, but some users
see CM as more a burden than a benefit.)
Missions which include data distribution among multiple locations should ensure
that their networks can handle the amount of network traffic. This is particularly
important given the general migration for satellite operations and data
transmission and delivery via the Internet. Pay close attention to NASA security
11
policies and network bandwidth needs when purchasing routers, switches,
firewalls and other network equipment.
Missions should use a common standard computer communications protocol. This
will preclude the need for proprietary protocols and their associated
hardware/software, and will greatly simplify system development,
implementation, operation, and maintenance. The current ubiquity of TCP/IP
makes it an obvious candidate for the near future.
The use of relational databases or object-oriented databases is extremely valuable
for managing data such as command and telemetry definitions and long term
engineering trending statistics. However, it is crucial that these databases be
properly designed and implemented by a knowledgeable database programmer. If
poorly implemented, such databases can lead to major maintenance headaches and
expenses. Also, database software will typically add overhead time to processes
that use them and require special expertise to administer.
Make maximum use of the Internet for any project requiring diverse geographic
data distribution, as it can greatly simplify global communications. Its inherent
ease of use and platform-independent nature make it an ideal means of on-line
communications, and a great way to save money (e.g., paper, phone, and mailing
costs). A local web server does, however, require some maintenance time, but this
can be minimized if well managed (e.g., via the use of some up-front and
consistent internal standards and controls). Be sure to check into security
requirements for hosting mission data on a public website
Use programming languages and tools that are appropriate for the task at hand,
and do not dictate the use of a particular language and/or tool without
consideration for the specific task.
Provide user-configuration capabilities, including command line access. It is often
convenient to temporarily modify the monitoring rule parameters (e.g., limit
values) or to screen pages for expected conditions (e.g., non-standard payload
configurations). This should be implemented within an overall configuration
management structure that establishes rules for what can be changed under
different levels of authority.
2.2.2 Automation:
12
User interface tools for an automated system should be capable of providing a
means to determine the current status related to operations and to interrupt the
automation when necessary. Automation does not need to provide routine display
of all spacecraft telemetry, since the purpose of such a system is to replace manual
monitoring, but should instead focus on giving a complete status of what
automation has done and what it is currently doing. To accomplish the status
display, try to leverage the capabilities provided by the Telemetry and Command
(T&C) software. As an example, use a status display that shows pseudo-telemetry
automation values using mechanisms built into the T&C software.
There should be two main focuses of ground system automation. The first focus
should be to automate routine functions of the ground system that are clearly
understood by the mission operations engineers. This can include telemetry data
flow verification, product deliveries, and commanding the spacecraft by running
specially tailored command procedures to handle common situations that have a
predefined and understood response. Any implemented automation procedures
should report status data about what they are doing for use by an automation
display mechanism. Uncommon situations should not be handled by automation
and should generate an alert when encountered.
The second focus should be to detect uncommon spacecraft configurations and
anomalies through passive monitoring of telemetry, and then issuing a page fora
human operator to investigate and take corrective action. This approach can
include database limit monitoring and configuration monitoring, and automated
notification by a procedure.
Use e-mail devices that are capable of running software to filter e-mails based on
source address and/or message content (e.g., Web Messenger Message Alerts for
Blackberry). By using a filtering tool, the set-up can be configured so that an
expected or nominal automation messages would generate, for example, a distinct
non-continuous ring, while unexpected and possibly critical message types would
produce a high volume and continuous ring. Such an arrangement allows the
operator to immediately distinguish between notifications that require attention
and those that do not.
The paging system should be designed to group related problems into categories
by either generation source or subsystem component. The different categories can
13
be associated with different mail list groups to maximize the delivery of
information to the pertinent recipients.
Implement a mechanism to gather status data about the primary T&C system for
delivery to a server that can display the status information on a website.
Additionally, add data checks to validate that the T&C application is functioning
properly. Ideally, an alert would notify users that T&C software is not functioning
properly.
It is useful and recommended that there be mechanisms designed for the purpose
of monitoring the primary telemetry monitoring system to ensure its availability
and functionality. An example is implementing a two-tiered client-server
architecture for sending out status information. The primary T&C would act like
the client and deliver a status data file to a server at set time intervals. The server
could then monitor that an updated file was delivered within the expected time
period.
Consider implementing a password protected web server to host pertinent status
information about the status of the ground automation and other useful operations
information such as data gap reports, network port connection statuses, disk usage
of critical system, etc for off-site access by operations personnel.
2.3 Enhancement methodologies:
2.3.1 Characteristics of Agile Methodologies:
According to Highsmith and Cockburn [24] , “what is new about agile methods is not the
practices they use, but their recognition of people as the primary drivers of project
success, coupled with an intense focus on effectiveness and manoeuvrability. This yields
a new combination of values and principles that define an agile world view.” Highsmith
further transcribes from the book Agile Competitors and Virtual Organizations the
definition of agility: “Agility... is a comprehensive response to the business challenges of
profiting from rapidly changing, continually fragmenting, global markets for highquality, high-performance, customer-configured goods and services.”
The following principles of agile methodologies are seen as the main differences between
agile and heavyweight:
14
People Oriented- Agile methodologies consider people – customers, developers,
stakeholders, and end users – as the most important factor of software methodologies. As
Jim Highsmith and Alistair Cockburn state, “The most important implication to managers
working in the agile manner is that it places more emphasis on people factors in the
project: amicability, talent, skill, and communication”. If the people on the project
are good enough, they can use almost any process and accomplish their assignment. If
they are not good enough, no process will repair their inadequacy. As Highsmith
highlights, “… people trump process… ”.
Adaptive – The participants in an agile process are not afraid of change. Agilest
welcome changes at all stages of the project. They view changes to the requirements as
good things, because they mean that the team has learned more about what it will take to
satisfy the market. Today the challenge is not stopping change but rather determining
how to better handle changes that occur throughout a project. “External Environment
changes cause critical variations. Because we cannot eliminate these changes, driving
down the cost of responding to them is the only viable strategy”.
Conformance to Actual – Agile methodologies value conformance to the actual results
as opposed to conformance to the detailed plan. High smith states, “Agile projects are not
controlled by conformance to plan but by conformance to the business value”. Each
iteration or development cycle adds business value to the ongoing product. For agilest,
the decision on whether business value has been added or not is not given by the
developers but instead by end users and customers.
Balancing Flexibility and Planning – Plans are important, but the problem is that
software projects can not be accurately predicted far into the future, because there are so
many variables to take into account. A better planning strategy is to make detailed plans
for the next few weeks, very rough plans for the next few months, and extremely crude
15
plans beyond that. In this view one of the main sources of complexity is the
irreversibility of decisions. If you can easily change your decisions, this means it’s less
important to get them right – which makes your life much simpler. The consequence for
agile design is that designers need to think about how they can avoid irreversibility in
their decisions. Rather than trying to get the right decision now, look for a way to either
put off the decision until later or make the decision in such a way that you will be able to
reverse it later on without too much difficulty.
Empirical Process – Agile methods develop software as an empirical (or nonlinear)
process. In engineering, processes are either defined or empirical. In other words, defined
process is one that can be started and allowed to run to completion producing the same
results every time. In software development it can not be considered a defined process
because too much change occurs during the time that the team is developing the product.
Laurie Williams states, “It is highly unlikely that any set of predefined steps will lead to a
desirable, predictable outcome because requirements change technology changes, people
are added and taken off the team, and so on”
Decentralized Approach – Integrating a decentralized management style can severely
impact a software project because it could save a lot of time than an autocratic
management process. Agile software development spreads out the decision making to the
developers. This does not mean that the developers take on the role of management.
Management is still needed to remove roadblocks standing in the way of progress.
However management recognizes the expertise of the technical team to make technical
decisions without their permission.
Simplicity – Agile teams always take the simplest path that is consistent with their goals.
Fowler states, “They (agile teams) don’t anticipate tomorrow’s problems and try to
defend against them today”. The reason for simplicity is so that it will be easy to
change the design if needed on a later date. Never produce more than what is necessary
16
and never produce documents attempting to predict the future as documents will become
outdated. “The larger the amount of documentation becomes, the more effort is needed to
find the required information, and the more effort is needed to keep the information up to
date”.
Collaboration – Agile methods involve customer feedback on a regular and frequent
basis. The customer of the software works closely with the development team, providing
frequent feedback on their efforts. As well, constant collaboration between agile team
members is essential. Due to the decentralized approach of the agile methods,
collaboration encourages discussion. As Martin Fowler describes, “Agile teams cannot
exist with occasional communication. They need continuous access to business expertise”.
Small Self-organizing teams – An agile team is a self organizing team. Responsibilities
are communicated to the team as a whole, and the team determines the best way to fulfill
them. Agile teams discuss and communicate together on all aspects of the project. That is
why agility works well in small teams. As Alistair Cockburn and Jim Highsmith
highlight, “Agile development is more difficult with larger teams. The average project
has only nine people, within the reach of most basic agile processes. Nevertheless, it is
interesting to occasionally find successful agile projects with 120 or even 250 people”.
17
Fig. (1) Agile Software Development Methodology
Implementation of Agile Methodologies:
In software development there exists a tension between quality, cost and time. Barry
Boehm states that, “As we progress from analysis, through to design, coding, testing and
production, the cost of fixing a problem increases exponentially”. The greatest
increase in cost is when fixing the problem after product introduction, a cost of
approximately 60 to 100 times more than eliminating the problem in the design phase.
Boehm suggests to reduce these costs, use heavyweight methodologies so that more time
is spent in upfront requirements gathering.
Alistair Cockburn disagrees with Boehm’s statement and reports, “As time goes by and
18
the program gets bigger, it costs LESS to implement a change with XP than with your
traditional methodology”. In addition, Kent Beck argues that the “cost of change”
curve is said to be flat in agile modelling. Moreover to strengthen this conviction they
show several XP practices to ensure that the cost associated with this curve is kept to
minimal.
Unit Testing and Test-Driven Development ensures that bugs and errors are found quickly and early so that it would be cheaper to fix. On-site customer and functional testing ensure the analysis and specification of the system is up-to-date and precise with business requirements. Pair programming allows two developers working together on one computer, which increases the chances of finding bugs and leads to a simpler design Refactoring and “once and only once” increases design consistency and adds more simplicity and flexibility to the structure. This ensures that the system is
well-designed and easy to change. Regular releases gives the customer feedback and forces the team to make the
“release to production” and maintenance phases as cheap as possible.
The above agile principles attack the roots of the high cost of fixing errors (with good
specifications, good designs, good implementation and fast feedback). But according
to Laurie Williams this does not mean that agile processes decrease or increase the
cost of developing compared to heavyweight . In Figure 12 below, Williams shows two
theoretical graphs to illustrate this. It represents the expense of traditional methods over
time and mentions that most of the expense is spent on new development and little
expense on revision which is done during the development cycle. Conversely, it
represents an agile (XP) method project’s expense. Here the opposite occurs,
demonstrating more spending on the revision and less on the development. According to
these results both graphs indicate the same level of expense over similar time periods.
William states, “Strong anecdotal evidence suggests that the additional revision does not
exceed the expense that would have been incurred had extensive up-front requirements
engineering, planning and designing”.
2.3.2 Implementing Agile Processes in Software Organizations :
Software has been part of modern society for more than 50 years, likewise so have
19
software development processes. However agile methods oldest methodology was
SCRUM and DSDM and they were not defined till mid-1990. Even though each
methodology has excellent anecdotal evidence and research results that their method
works, not enough statistical and metric proof has been gathered. Geoffrey Moore, in
his book Crossing the Chasm, describes five types of profiles of technology adopters:
Innovators who pursue new concepts aggressively; early adopters who pursue new
concepts very early in the lifecycle; early majority wait and see before buying into a new
concept; the late majority who are concerned about their ability to handle a new concept;
and laggards who do not want anything to do with new approaches. According to
Scott Ambler, people that fit the innovator or early adopter would adopt agile techniques.
Moreover, since there is sufficient anecdotal evidence, the early majority are starting to
adopt agility to their organization. Furthermore he adds, “It will take several years,
perhaps even a decade, until we have incontrovertible proof that agile software
development work in practice” .DaimlerChrysler was the first organization to use agile
methods that introduced XP practices with the Chrysler Comprehensive Compensation
(C3) project, which is a very successful payroll system implemented in Smalltalk. The C3
project began in January 1995 under a fixed priced contract and a year later failed to
deliver a proper working payroll system .Kent Beck, the developer of XP, was called in to
help with performance tuning of C3 project and found that the code was poorly factored,
there was no repeatable tests, and the management had lost confidence in the project.
Beck threw away all the previous code and the fixed-price contract was cancelled. He
reorganized the team and made up the rules of XP that they had to follow: “putting
customer on-site to work with the developers, sharing code techniques, pairing
developers, performing automated unit testing and editing code frequently to keep it
simple”[48]. All these modifications enhanced and developed a successful payroll system
that did more than what was needed. Chrysler still uses the XP concept as Christen Wege,
portal and Web application architect, mentions, “Today, Stuttgart, Germany-based
DaimlerChrysler AG still uses extreme programming within several application
development groups in the U.S. and Germany”.
20
One of the most difficult tasks involved with using agile processes is successfully
introducing them into an organization that has been using their traditional organization
structure for years. “Part of [the Big Design Up-Front] culture is the creation of fiefdoms
within the program organization. Adopting [agile processes] will radically change the
functions of the organization within the program and consequently change the staff and
funding profiles of the organizations” [6]. Some of the traditional roles such as the
Quality Assurance and testing would resist the change as more attention and work is
needed from these roles after each iteration in an agile process. Management are
uncomfortable with not having documents to judge the progress of their project and not
having a final commitment date of delivery with a bottom line cost . Still accordingly
to Chris Dial, an analyst at Forrester Research Inc, “organizations are increasingly
turning to new techniques to make the most of the smaller development teams and
contend with more complex, distributed applications”. .
A Singapore lending project was declared undoable until Jeff De Luca, a project director
of Nebulon, a leading information technology firm in Melbourne, took on the project
using the agile methodology Feature-Driven Development (FDD). Previously the
deliverables included 3,500 pages of use cases, an object model with hundreds of classes,
thousands of attributes (but no methods) and no code. De Luca used techniques such as
keeping code simple, testing often and delivering small features of the application as they
are ready. Within 2 months De Luca’s team was producing demonstrable features for the
client and 4 months later the project was completed and under budget. When asked what
his key to success De Luca responded was, “The key is having good people, good domain
experts, good developers and good chief programmers. No process makes up for a lack of
talent and skill” [49]. This example shows a clear example of why working code is the
ultimate arbiter of real progress. As Jim High smith states, “In the end, thousands of use
cases and hundreds of object model elements did not prove real progress” [49].
21
Caterpillar Financial Services Corp. also used an agile technique to develop a critical
web-based financial system for its dealers all over the world. The success of this project
according to Tom DePauw, manager of IT at Caterpillar, was using agile methods to
build small, usable parts of Java based applications early, rather than one large
application at the end of the project. Further more a large US based financial
institution agrees that the need to produce functional parts of the application regularly to
the customer will drive your company to consider agile methodologies. They state
“Customers want applications in 90 days now, no matter how complex they are, and you
can’t do that with traditional methods”.
However, there are some downfalls in using agile methodologies in the software industry
and one of them is their over emphasis towards customer collaboration. According to
Erkki Vuorenmaa, manager of IT company in Finland, getting business people involved
in the development process is very “irritating” and awkward job, and without the
determined “good” customer it would be hard to develop a quality software. Another
criticism of agile methods is concerning project costs. Agile projects have no fixed price
or fixed schedule and projects are open-ended and evolve as requirements change.
Therefore it becomes harder for the manager and customer to accept this technique as
customers would rather know the total cost of the project and overall project schedule
beforehand. On the other hand Alistair Cockburn pointed out that agile and fixed price
are not mutually exclusive. He came up with the version of agility through a succession
of fixed price projects. Cockburn explains, “In fixed price projects the price is usually
fixed to low, so you want to do everything you can to boost productivity, and that
includes using an agile process”.
Motorola’s experience with agile methods in its development organization found that it
was not useful for global development projects. Senior architect of Motorola believed that
the agile method [Extreme Programming] values small teams and that was not always
22
possible. Surprisingly some believe that after mangers hear the name ‘extreme
programming’ they get turned off. However, on the upside, agile methods provide short
daily meetings that would lead to better continual feedback; this keeps the cost to
minimal. As a manager at Sunoco Inc says, “If the consultant is incompetent or the
technology is wrong, I get the first indication after 30 days. I’m cutting my losses
quickly” .
Agile practices have been widely accepted in many organizations due to their similarities
to CMM (Capability Maturity Model) standards. The development of the CMM has
become a standard to well-defined and well-documented software development processes
for organizations to follow to succeed in their project. Laurie Williams adds, “Many
CMM or ISO 9000 now think that partial adoption of agile practices, when handled with
care, might increase their efficiencies without damaging their certifications” . Mark
Paulk, from the Software Engineering Institute, states, “XP has good engineering
practices that can work well with the CMM and other highly structured models. The key
is to carefully consider XP practices and implement them in the right environment”.
He goes on to show that certain agile practices of XP are similar to Level 2, 3 and some
of 4 practices of CMM (for the complete table of CMM standards refer to Appendix D).
For example, XP meets CMM Level 2 requirements management condition through its
use of stories, an onsite customer, and continuous integration. XP address software
project planning in the planning game and small releases. XP’s practices with “big visual
chart”, project velocity, and commitments for small releases meet Software project
tracking and oversight in CMM level 2. In CMM level 3 several XP practices address
software product engineering such as metaphor, simple design, refactoring, coding
standards and unit testing. XP’s strong emphasis on communication and pair
programming consecutively addresses intergroup coordination and peer reviews of CMM
level 3. Beyond level 3, XP only address as few of the Level 4 and 5 key process areas
23
Moreover this popularity of Extreme programming to the level of alchemy was
supported by respected people like Tom DeMarco that once stated that, “An organization
employing Extreme Programming moved from CMM Level 1 to CMM Level 4 within 5
months”.
Agile Methods
Heavy Methods
Approach Adaptive Predictive
Success Measurement Business Value Conformation to plan
Project size Small Large
Management Style Decentralized Autocratic
Perspective Change Change Adaptability Change Sustainability
Culture Leadership-Collaboration Command-Control
Documentation Low Heavy
Emphasis People-Oriented Process Oriented
Cycles Numerous Limited
Domain Unpredictable/Exploratory Predictable
Upfront Planning Minimal Comprehensive
Return on Investment Early in Project End of Project
Team Size Small/Creative Large
Table 1: Difference in Agile and Heavyweight Methodologies
2.4Onboard computer systems design:
2.4.1 DSP vs. General Purpose CPUs:
• DSPs tend to run one program, not many programs.
– Hence OSes are much simpler, there is no virtual memory or protection, ...
• DSPs usually run applications with hard real-time constraints:
24
– You must account for anything that could happen in a time slot
– All possible interrupts or exceptions must be accounted for and their collective time be subtracted from the time interval.
– Therefore, exceptions are BAD.
• DSPs usually process infinite continuous data streams.
• The design of DSP architectures and ISAs driven by the requirements of DSP algorithms.
2.4.2 Missile guidance for onboard systems:
It refers to a variety of methods of guiding a missile or a guided bomb to its intended
target. The missile's target accuracy is a critical factor for its effectiveness. Guidance
systems improve missile accuracy by improving its "Single Shot Kill Probability"
(SSKP), which is part of combat survivability calculations associated with salvo combat
model.[1][2]
These guidance technologies can generally be divided up into a number of categories,
with the broadest categories being "active," "passive" and "preset" guidance. Missiles and
guided bombs generally use similar types of guidance system, the difference between the
two being that missiles are powered by an onboard engine, whereas guided bombs rely on
the speed and height of the launch aircraft for propulsion.
History:
The concept of missile guidance originated at least as early as World War I, with the idea
of remotely guiding an airplane bomb onto a target. In World War II guided missiles were
first developed, as part of the German V-weapons program.
Categories of guidance systems:
Guidance systems are divided into different categories according to what type of target
they are designed for - either fixed targets or moving targets. The weapons can be divided
into two broad categories, Go-Onto-Target (GOT) and Go-Onto-Location-in-Space
(GOLIS) guidance systems.[4] A GOT missile can target either a moving or fixed target,
whereas a GOLIS weapon is limited to a stationary or near-stationary target. The
trajectory that a missile takes while attacking a moving target is dependent upon the
25
movement of the target. Also, a moving target can be an immediate threat to the sender of
the missile. The target needs to be eliminated in a timely fashion in order to preserve the
integrity of the sender. In GOLIS systems the problem is simpler because the target is not
moving.
GOT systems:
In every GOT system there are three subsystems:
Target tracker
Missile tracker
Guidance computer
The way these three subsystems are distributed between the missile and the launcher
result in two different categories:
Remote Control Guidance: The guidance computer is on the launcher. The
target tracker is also placed on the launching platform.
Homing Guidance: The guidance computers are in the missile and in the
target tracker.
Remote control guidance:
These guidance systems usually need the use of radars and a radio or wired link between
the control point and the missile; in other words, the trajectory is controlled with the
information transmitted via radio or wire.
System include
Command Guidance - The missile tracker is on the launching platform. These missiles
are totally controlled by the launching platform that sends all control orders to the missile.
The 2 variants are
26
Command to Line-Of-Sight (CLOS)
Command Off Line-Of-Sight (COLOS)
Line-Of-Sight Beam Riding Guidance (LOSBR) :– The missile tracker is on board the
missile. It has already some orientation capability, in order to fly inside the beam that the
launching platform is using to illuminate the target. It can be manual or automatic.[5]
Command to Line-Of-Sight (CLOS):
The CLOS system uses only the angular coordinates between the missile and the target to
ensure the collision. The missile will have to be in the line of sight between the launcher
and the target (LOS), correcting any deviation of the missile in relation to this line. Due to
the amount of missiles that use this guidance system, they are usually are subdivided into
four groups:
Manual Command to Line-Of-Sight (MCLOS), The target tracking and the
missile tracking and control is performed manually. The operator watches the
missile flight and uses some sort of signaling system to command the missile back
into the straight line between the operator and the target (the "line of sight").
Typically useful only for slower targets where significant "lead" is not required.
MCLOS is a subtype of command guided systems. In the case of glide bombs or
missiles against ships or the supersonic Wasserfall against slow-moving B-17
Flying Fortress bombers this system worked, but as speeds increased MCLOS was
quickly rendered useless for most roles.
Semi-Manual Command to Line-Of-Sight (SMCLOS), The target tracking is
automatic and the missile tracking and control is manual
Semi-Automatic Command to Line-Of-Sight (SACLOS), The target tracking is
manual and the missile tracking and control is automatic. Is similar to MCLOS but
some automatic system positions the missile in the line of sight while the operator
simply tracks the target. *SACLOS has the advantage of allowing the missile to
start in a position invisible to the user, as well as generally being considerably
easier to operate. SACLOS is the most common form of guidance against ground
targets such as tanks and bunkers.
Automatic Command to Line-Of-Sight (ACLOS), The target tracking, missile
tracking and control are automatic.
27
Command Off Line-Of-Sight (COLOS):
This guidance system was one of the first to be used and still is in service, mainly in anti-
aircraft missiles. In this system, the missile tracker and the target tracker can be oriented
in different directions. The guidance system ensures the interception of the target by the
missile by locating both in space. This means that they will not rely on the angular
coordinates like in CLOS systems. They will need another coordinate which is distance.
To make it possible, both target and missile trackers have to be active. They are always
automatic and the radar has been used as the only sensor in these systems. The SM-2MR
Standard is inertially guided during its mid-course phase, but it is assisted by a COLOS
system via radar link provided by the AN/SPY-1 radar installed in the launching platform.
Line-Of-Sight Beam Riding Guidance (LOSBR):
LOSBR uses a "beam" of some sort, typically radio, radar or laser, is pointed at the target
and detectors on the rear of the missile keep it centered in the beam. Beam riding systems
are often SACLOS, but do not have to be; in other systems the beam is part of an
automated radar tracking system. A case in point is later versions of the RIM-8
Talos missile as used in Vietnam - the radar beam was used to take the missile on a high
arcing flight and then gradually brought down in the vertical plane of the target aircraft,
the more accurate SARH homing being used at the last moment for the actual strike. This
gave the enemy pilot the least possible warning that his aircraft was being illuminated by
missile guidance radar, as opposed to search radar. This is an important distinction, as the
nature of the signal differs, and is used as a cue for evasive action.
LOSBR suffers from the inherent weakness of inaccuracy with increasing range as the
beam spreads out. Laser beam riders are more accurate in this regards, but are all short-
range, and even the laser can be degraded by bad weather. On the other hand, SARH
becomes more accurate with decreasing distance to the target, so the two systems are
complementary.[5]
Homing guidance:
Active homing:
Active homing uses a radar system on the missile to provide a guidance signal. Typically
electronics in the missile keep the radar pointed directly at the target, and the missile then
looks at this "angle" of its own centerline to guide itself. Radar resolution is based on the
28
size of the antenna, so in a smaller missile these systems are useful for attacking only
large targets, ships or large bombers for instance. Active radar systems remain in
widespread use in anti-shipping missiles, and in "fire-and-forget" air-to-air missile
systems such as AMRAAM and R-77
Semi-active homing:
Semi-active homing systems combine a radar receiver on the missile with a radar
broadcaster located "elsewhere". Since the missile is typically being launched after the
target was detected using a powerful radar system, it makes sense to use that same radar
system to track the target, thereby avoiding problems with resolution or power. SARH is
by far the most common "all weather" guidance solution for anti-aircraft systems, both
ground and air launched.
It has the disadvantage for air-launched systems that the launch aircraft must keep
moving towards the target in order to maintain radar and guidance lock. This has the
potential to bring it within range of shorter-ranged IR-guided missile systems, an
important consideration now that "all aspect" IR missiles are capable of "kills" from head
on, something which did not prevail in the early days of guided missiles. For ships and
mobile or fixed ground-based systems, this is irrelevant as the speed (and often size) of
the launch platform precludes "running away" from the target or opening the range so as
to make the enemy attack fail.
SALH is a similar system using a laser as a signal. However, most laser-guided weapons
employ a turret-mounted laser designator which increases the launching aircraft's ability
to manoeuvre after launch. How much manoeuvring can be done by the guiding aircraft
will depend on the turret field of view and the systems ability to maintain a lock-on while
manoeuvring. As most air-launched, laser-guided munitions are employed against surface
targets the designator providing the guidance to the missile need not be the launching
aircraft; designation can be provided by another aircraft or by a completely separate
source (frequently troops on the ground equipped with the appropriate laser designator).
Passive homing:
Infrared homing is a passive system in which heat generated by the target is detected and
homed on. Typically used in the anti aircraft role to track the heat of jet engines, it has
29
also been used in the anti-vehicle role with some success. This means of guidance is
sometimes also referred to as "heat seeking".
Contrast seekers use a television camera, typically black and white, to image a field of
view in front of the missile, which is presented to the operator. When launched, the
electronics in the missile look for the spot on the image where the contrast changes the
fastest, both vertically and horizontally, and then attempts to keep that spot at a constant
location in its view. Contrast seekers have been used for air-to-ground missiles, including
the AGM_4 Maverick, because most ground targets can be distinguished only by visual
means. However they rely on there being strong contrast changes to track, and even
traditional camouflage can render them unable to "lock on".
Retransmission homing:
Retransmission homing, also called Track Via Missile(TVM), is a hybrid
between command guidance, semi-active radar homing and active radar homing. The
missile picks up radiation broadcast by the tracking radar which bounces off the target
and relays it to the tracking station, which relays commands back to the missile.
3. Testing and Quality Assurance process:
The ability to destroy in-flight hostile aircraft, cruise missiles and the full spectrum of
ballistic missiles is critical to the survival of military forces on the battlefield. This
capability is accomplished through the employment of a netted and distributed
architecture composed of sensors, data distribution systems and a variety of air defense
weapons. The capabilities of such air defense systems are constantly being advanced to
keep pace with the threat in terms of speed, accuracy and lethality.
Services: Air defense weapon systems are composed of a variety of major sub-systems to
include sensor, BMC3I and interceptor. Our team experts support the testing of all such
30
components to include infrared seekers, command and control battle management
systems, communications systems, precision pointing and tracking optics, as well as radar
and signal processors. As part of the testing process, multiple operational test events are
developed, executed and evaluated. Our personnel develop detailed reports from the raw
data that is recorded throughout the testing period. Additionally, personnel participate in
the follow-on review of all information and evaluations to determine the success or
failure of each test criteria. Personnel also assist in the development of the Final Test
Report that is presented to the government representative.
TestStages:
Planning: Test planning begins with the development of an effective and affordable test
concept that serves as the bases for the creation of a test plan. A thorough analysis of all
relevant documents is then performed to gain a detailed understanding of the
characteristics and capabilities of the system that is being tested. An analysis of the
system’s operational requirements and design specifications is also necessary to
understanding the performance and effectiveness measures that will be evaluated. Such
efforts form the basis for all other system analysis activities.
Coordination: Close coordination within the test community is essential in order to
minimize resource requirements and costs, eliminate unnecessary redundancy and
maximize efficiency. Additionally, it serves to align the collective efforts of material
developers, evaluators and key decision makers. In this manner test requirements/events
are assessed, appropriate test beds are identified, data collection requirements are
determined and test resources are allocated. Such coordination is accomplished
throughout the testing period via integrated process and product teams, in process
reviews, design reviews and technical working groups.
Execution: Testing is conducted in one or more environments, such as laboratory,
simulation facility and field. Additionally, a test may be conducted at the component,
subsystem, or system level. Detailed test procedures are developed and implemented to
satisfy test plan requirements and ensure appropriate data is collected on each test
objective.
31
Analysis: Throughout the conduct of a test, data collectors observe each test event, record
information and perform an initial analysis of the data gathered. Test results are then
combined assimilating and analyzed to quantify performance and effectiveness of the
system in comparison with established norms and requirements. Analytical tools may
include specialized data processing equipment and techniques, application software and
analytical expertise.
Reporting: Once all information has been assessed, the results along with quantifiable
measurements of data accuracy and confidence levels are presented in the final test report.
4. Case study on Air defense:
4.1Healthcare:
A Challenging Environment:
Employing some 7,000 staff across nine different hospitals, United Bristol Healthcare
NHS Trust (UBHT) is one of the largest acute trusts in the country as well as being a
major teaching and research centre for the South West. In 2005, the Trust had over
110,000 inpatient and day case admissions. Dave Oat way is the Trust’s Computer
32
Services Manager, responsible for all operational IT services including support for 4,000
users and the introduction of new technologies and applications to meet clinical needs.
His involvement with wireless dates back to 2003 when a number of small pilot systems
were installed to overcome specific problems. In common with many other Trusts, UBHT
is spread across several buildings and staff are quite frequently relocated from one
building to another, often on a temporary basis. The trust’s location in the centre of
Bristol adds to the challenge of providing connectivity; cabling between sites would mean
tunnelling under busy roads, entailing disruption and high costs. Thus, one of the Trust’s
first wireless installations was a temporary system providing connectivity for a small
group of people who had relocated to a different building. Another installation saw
wireless being used within a ward to enable haematologists to use laptops – equipped
with a barcode scanner – to scan patients’ wristbands to check blood groups prior to
treatment. With this type of application, data is available immediately on any laptop,
avoiding any problems of lag time, for any member of staff or department that has a role
in the care of that patient.
Seeking a long-term solution for wireless security:
As part of the Trust’s implementation of the National Programme for IT, there is a
commitment to utilise wireless throughout all the hospitals when clinical need justifies the
use of the technology. Even with the small, early installations of wireless at Bristol, it had
always been recognised that the IT department would need to tackle the issues of control
and security associated with the technology before broader-ranging systems could be
approved and rolled out across the hospital over a planned two year period. UBHT has
been working with IT security specialists Peapod for a decade on a wide range of security
integration projects. Early in 2005, Dave Oat way turned to Peapod for advice on
identifying a robust approach to wireless which would offer guaranteed security and a
foundation upon which more installations could be rolled out. Peapod advised them to
consider utilising an Air Defense solution, who provided a demonstration of their
proposed system and carried out a survey of the UBHT site, providing a report on what
they had found. Dave Oat way commented: “We were keen to work with an organisation
that was independent of manufacturers, and Air Defense fitted this bill, as well as being
recommended by Peapod. The ability of their solution to detect rogue access points was
critical and more importantly deny them service was a feature which was missing from
33
many other companies’ offerings. A further important factor was that we felt AirDefense
was the type of company with which we could develop a partnership and a long-term
relationship – rather than just opt for a pure customer/supplier scenario”. The proposed
system was designed to provide the Trust with a ‘starter solution’ which could be quickly
and easily expanded as the number of wireless installations increased and budget became
available. It is an overlay network to the Cisco infrastructure. In early 2006, an Air
Defense wireless security appliance and two wireless sensors were installed; by mid 2007
there will be approximately 1,000 access points and 200 sensors. Air Defense Enterprise
was installed to constantly monitor and ensure the security of the data over the network.
Wireless now and in the future:
Since the Air Defense solution was implemented, Dave Oat way and his team have been
able to detect when and where people are using wireless equipment and devices, as well
as being able to automatically stop any unauthorised attempts to attach to the network. In
addition, the system provides moment to moment details – presented as graphs – of traffic
and potential threats, which will enable the Trust to identify and plan for future wireless
installations. The Trust’s growing number of wireless systems, which are viewed as
being complementary to traditional cabling solutions, are predominantly being used in
ward environments and in a theatre suite to provide a fast and efficient way of entering
and retrieving patient data. UBHT is also looking at introducing wireless telephones
which will allow clinicians to speak to whoever is trying to contact them immediately –
rather than having to respond to a pager at an available phone line, all of which takes up
valuable time. Another potential application is for the hospital’s Intensive Care Unit. If
someone is taken ill within the hospital and ideally needs to be moved to ICU – but there
are no beds available – the requisite monitoring equipment can be taken down to the ward
and then connected – using wireless – back to ICU. In this way, ICU staff will be able to
monitor a patient with access to all their sophisticated equipment, without the patient
having to be physically within the Unit. Given the pressure on beds in ICU, this has the
potential to allow UBHT to offer improved care to a larger number of seriously ill
patients. A number of significant national projects are also being progressed, including
PACS, a digital archiving and retrieval system for x-rays. With the plan to roll out this
major new system on wireless, combined with the need to meet government timelines for
this service, the need for a robust infrastructure and stringent security is of paramount
34
importance. Dave Oat way is enthusiastic about the benefits and exciting applications that
wireless can deliver within a hospital environment, but is keen to stress that patient data
confidentiality can only be assured with the installation of a robust infrastructure, such as
that recommended by Peapod and delivered by Air Defense. “With cabling there are
obviously clearly defined boundaries and it is much easier to limit the risk of
unauthorised access. At Bristol, we have thousands of people walking around our
buildings every single day. Although the vast majority will be law-abiding, we have to
protect against threats that we don’t even know are out there. The Air Defense solution
enables us to do this.”
4.2. Communications:
Customer Description:
BT is one of the world’s leading providers of communications solutions serving
customers in Europe, the Americas and Asia Pacific. Its principal activities include
networked IT services, local, national and international telecommunications services, and
higher-value broadband and internet products and services. In the UK, BT serves more
than 20 million business and residential customers with more than 30 million exchange
lines, as well as providing network services to other licensed operators. BT is known
internationally as a major technology player - pioneering the digital advances that are
shaping and driving the information age.
Problem:
BT’s employees are highly mobile and needed the flexibility to work securely at multiple
locations. “Hot desking” to give employees access to the company’s network was tried
but was difficult, expensive and impractical. Wireless technology was generally agreed to
be the most beneficial solution and with this came they need to establish the best of breed
security for the wireless infrastructure. Employees had laptops and other wireless enabled
devices and needed to access email, customer records, and other work applications at
multiple locations. The need to do this securely was imperative in the solution BT
chose.BT has multiple sites some of which are located in the heart of city centers and
many offices could detect more than 30 other Wireless LANs. This meant that a complete
site survey had to be carried out at each location to understand what the complexities
35
were and how many wireless networks actually invaded BT’s airspace.At some sites in
central London, the initial survey detected that at regular intervals alarms might be raised
from the automated bus stop updates. This type of traffic, while not a threat could create
multiple security alarms. Other locations in more rural settings provided different
problems of distance between buildings and large communal areas. The risks for BT as an
organization and the implications for its management team if the solution they chose was
not scalable were immense. The problem of partitioning friendly neighbouring wireless
LANs from those that could present a malicious threat was essential. The threats to any
wireless deployment are rogue or unauthorized access so the problem for BT was to be
able to analyse existing and zero day threats in real-time against historical data to
accurately detect all attacks and anomalous behaviour originating inside or outside the
organization. Doing this while providing IT support for over 60,000 workers seamlessly
and without increasing IT management time was seen to be essential.
Requirements:
BT needed a solution that could detect intruders and rogue access points automatically
and secure their airwaves cost effectively. It needed a solution that could distinguish
between the multiple legitimate neighbouring wireless networks and those that were
malicious. In addition it needed to be able to terminate wireless connections between an
intruder and an authorized access point and also to terminate authorized devices with
rogue access points. Most particularly it required the vendor it chose to be able to enforce
the BT security policy to all its mobile workforce without disrupting its business. The
solution had to work with the Cisco based network infrastructure.
Solution:
BT evaluated several Wireless LAN security products before deciding which one to
purchase. The evaluation process was exacting. Michael Malcolm RF Manager at BT said
“I was a sceptic. I was not going to allow wireless connectivity at BT unless I was
convinced that it could be provided securely.” The evaluation and testing process was
extremely rigorous and thorough. The site surveys were completed using Air Defense
Architect which provides complete design and simulation of wireless LANs based on
building-specific environments. This product accurately and predictively helped design
the Wireless networks (802.11) before the actual deployment of access points, sensors
and other wireless devices. For the deployment BT chose to use Air Defense Enterprise
36
provided through a specialist solutions provider in the UK called Pentura. They have
currently deployed sensors in 15 of 21 sites in the UK and plan to roll out the solution
across European offices. The Air Defense system helps BT to:
• Increase the productivity of its workforce.
• Define, enforce and measure adherence to their security policy.
•Continuously monitor the WLAN providing maximum security and operational integrity of the network
• Ensure BT employees are not logging onto rogue or neighbouring networks
• Confirm wireless devices are within permitted areas.
References:
1. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/104654419/DSP-Processor-Architecture
2. http://www.airdefense.net/partners/bro_sheets/UBHT.pdf
3. http://www.airdefense.net/solutions/pdf/Telecom.pdf
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_guidance
5. http://pds10.egloos.com/pds/200808/13/85/ A_comparision_between_Agile_and_Traditional_SW_development_methodologies.pdf
6. http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/labs/DRDL/English/index.jsp?pg=HistoricalBG.jsp
7. http://www.glacier-tech.com/mts.htm
37
top related