mission partner environment (mpe) and nato federated mission networking (fmn) update combined joint...
TRANSCRIPT
Mission Partner Environment (MPE) and
NATO Federated Mission Networking (FMN)Update
Combined Joint Operations From the Sea11 May 2015
Joint Staff JS J6 DDC5I IID
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Agenda
• MPE Overview• Joint Information Environment (JIE)
• US MPE and NATO FMN• Parallel in synch efforts by other nations
Back Up
• JMEI Definitions
• Coalition mission partner options
• “Third Stack”
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE Range of Military Operations
UNCLASSNETWORKS
US BICES-X
Classified Releasable FEDERATIONS of MISSION NETWORKS
MN BICES
HA/DR MCO
What is the CDRs intent? What is the mission? Who are the partners? What information needs to be shared? What classification and releasability level(s) do you need
to operate in?
LOW TO HIGH 3
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Mission Partner Environment (MPE)
Operational Context: As a standard practice, US Forces use SIPRNet as the primary warfighting network for operations. In Afghanistan, this constrained the ability of US commanders to speak with immediacy to all operational commanders (mission partners)
• The need to mitigate risk and provide the commanders with strategic, operational and tactical flexibility spurred the development of the Afghanistan Mission Network (AMN) for coalition information sharing & mission tasks -- get the “fight” off the SIPRNet
Lessons Learned & Guiding Principles:
• Operational imperative – unity of effort, enable communications with all mission partners to execute the Commander’s intent in a single security and releasability environment.
• MPE is not a single network – it is a framework describing USA contribution(s) to a federation of partner provided mission specific networks, systems, and TTPs
• No intent establish a new “program of record” as MPE is not a “thing” to purchase; focus is on re-purposing existing materiel and non-materiel enablers and capabilities.
• Alignment with NATO’s Federated Mission Networking (FMN)
“We’re one year away from forgetting everything we learned in Afghanistan.” Iron Major, USMC - Communications Officer 4
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIEDUNCLASSIFIED
• Lesson Learned: USA use of SIPRNet as primary C2 network during mission partner operations generates strategic, operational and tactical limitations:– Forces on different networks with inadequate cross-domain solutions resulted in poor
ops, planning and intelligence information exchange between NATO, U.S. and other partner forces in ISAF
– Non-materiel DOTMLPF, TTP and Policy solutions as or MORE important than materiel solutions
• Need for strategic to tactical human-to-human information exchange in a common language on same security and releasability level in real time – share by default; classify by exception
• Consistent DoD ability to employ in-place information sharing, TTP, and operational C4ISR to support both persistent and episodic (mission specific) operations with mission partners
• MPE leverages a “federation of sovereign C2 networks” created by the contribution of two or more nation “mission networks” to establish a mission specific enterprise in which all mission partners may operate as peers within a single classification and releasability policy
MPE Operational Context
5
Solution: Move coalition fight off of national networks [SIPRNet]
NATO / ISAF UNCLASSIFIED
NATO / ISAF UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE Enduring and Episodic Definitions
7 UNCLASSIFIED
“US and Mission Partners collaborate in Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Enduring environments day to day with the capability to transition to conducting operations within a MPE Episodic for any operation”
Application of MPE Principles and Network Relationships and Characteristics differ
(known steady state relationships vs. unknown situation shaped coalition membership)
• MPE Enduring: Strategic Level (information sharing & planning)– Asynchronous and non-real time information sharing
– Persistent – time not a factor
– Specified Mission Partners (bilateral or multi-lateral “Communities of Interest)
– Combatant Command (CCMD) HQ capabilities for Mission Partner engagement/planning
– Technologically dependent
– Integrated with and enabled by Joint Information Environment (JIE)
• MPE Episodic: Operational to Tactical Level (Conduct Operations)– Synchronous and near-real-time or real-time conduct of operational mission tasks
– Episodic – time to establish always a factor
– Mission Focused (exercise or contingency operation)
– Unknown mission partners, emergent mission; unknown duration
– JTF and component capabilities for peer to peer Mission Partner operations
– US may not be lead; but must leverage JIE to contribute DOTMLPF, P & TTP to coalition
8
EnduringMPE“C”
Persistent CCDR level US Centric Bi-lateral /Multi-lateral Specified Mission
Partners
Temporal CJTF level Commander centric
Unknown Coalition of the Willing
Joint Information Environment (JIE) – Enduring & Episodic MPE
LEGEND
National Classified Network (e.g. SIPRnet)National Unclassified Network (e.g. NIPRnet)
National Contribution (3rd Stack); National DOTMLPF-P, IA, Security
Enduring MPE ConnectionEpisodic MPE Federated Network; Commander accepts risk, sets rules
EpisodicMPE
CJTF
CFACCCFLCC
CFMCCCFSOCC
MP B
MP D
MP CMP Y
MP X
e.g. Existing bi-lateral and multi-lateral network relationships: MN BICES and other named network relationships, etc.
JIEConnectAccessShare
EnduringMPE“A”
MPG
MP Z
MP P
MP A
MP Q
Cross Security Level Exchange “Guard”
Rel to Mission or ExerciseCCMD
EnduringMPE“B”
MPG
CCMD
CCMD
SIPRNet and NIPRNet
MPG = Mission Partner Gateway
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
US BICES-XFTI
PACOM CENTCOM
EUCOM
TNE
TNETNE
SIPRNET TIER 1
Tier 1 SIPR connection currently
provides only CENTCOM users access to the
US BICES-X FTI
Mission Partner L
JIE
ConnectAccessShare
Mission Partner M
Mission Partner N
Mission Partner O
EnduringMPE
EnduringMPE“B”
MN BICES
Today’s MPE Enduring Environments
9
Mission Partners collaborate via a JIE Tier I environment but must be able to rapidly shift to operating within a Episodic Mission Partner Environment (MPE) framework as situation(s) dictate
Interim
Plus other existing bi-lateral and multi-lateral network relationships some of
which may not be directly connected to current DoD Networks or future JIE
MPG
MPG
EnduringMPE“A”
SIPRNet and NIPRNet
CCMD
CCMD
Collaborate and Share Information
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Near Term - Episodic Capability
• Joining Membership and Exiting Instructions (JMEI)
• Policy⁻ Collective agreement by originating partners
• Management⁻ Pre-mission “coalition of willing” identification of, and training and equipping to agnostic standards
• “Third Stack”⁻ Provided by each Mission Network contributor
• Training & Education
• Governance– Mission CDR specific as shaped by partner(s)
• CIAV
10
MPE: Provides a consistent overarching capability framework for CCMDs based on CONOPS, Doctrine, TTP, Policy, Governance, Common Standards, Training, and Interoperability
EpisodicMPE
CJTF
CFACCCFLCC
CFMCCCFSOCC
MP B
MP D
MP CMP Y
MP X
MP Z
MP P
MP A
MP Q
Self provided National SecretSelf provided National UnclassifiedSelf provided Cross Security Level Information Exchange Guard
Conduct coalition operations, tasks, and activities in a “REL to mission” primary C2 network environment
SECRET REL Mission
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Draft Operation XXXX XXXX (XX) Mission Network Relationships
• Joining Membership and Exiting Instructions (JMEI)⁻ Specific to XXX
• OAR Policy⁻ Foundation of Trust - Collective agreement by originating XXX partners
• “Third Stack”⁻ “REL XXX” DOTMLPF provided by each Mission Network contributor⁻ Network, capabilities, TTP employed therein to conduct XXX Ops
• Training & Education⁻ Leadership direction, Culture change, and Practice
• Governance⁻ Mission CDR specific as shaped by partner(s)
• CIAV (XXX specific activities per CDR’s Guidance)⁻ Compare XXX partner operational processes⁻ Deliberate “Do No Harm” coordinated change of DOTMLPF and TTP
11
Specific C2 relationships for XXX related exercises and/or operations is NOT depicted
SECRET REL XXX
CJTF
CFACCCFLCC
CFMCCCFSOCC
MP B
MP D
MP CMP Y
MP X
MP Z
MP P
MP A
MP Q
Self provided National SecretSelf provided National UnclassifiedSelf provided Cross Security Level Information Exchange Guard
MN BICES
Create XXX CoI?Represents one or more US
mission network “nodes” dedicated to Op XXX
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
The US MPE JMEI Joining Instructions were signed by LTG Mark Bowman, US Joint Staff J6 on 21 August 2014
• Distribution is to any and all partners• Content derived from ISAF AMN JMEI and draft NATO FMN Implementation
Plan (NFIP) Volume 2 and informed by lessons from COMBINED ENDEAVOR (CE) 2013 and planning for CE2014
• Governance and implementation within US DoD to be accomplished via:
• DoD 8110.1 Instruction (Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Information Sharing Capability Implementation for the DoD) signed 25 Nov 2014 by DoD CIO
• CJCSI* 5128.1 Mission Partner Environment Executive Steering Committee (MPE ESC) Governance and Management signed 1 October 2014
• Policy. It is US DoD policy that: MPE will serve as the framework for information sharing and conduct of coalition operational activities between DoD Components and Mission Partners
*CJCSI = Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction
MPE Implementation and Policy Within US DoD
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Mission Partner Environment (MPE)Traceability
MPE Pedigree
Strengthening Security Relationships: our relationships with mission partners are a critical component of multi-national engagement and support our collective security
Combine capabilities with mission partners: form, evolve, dissolve, and re-form in different arrangements in time and space
Scalable: ranging from an individual unit enrolling the expertise of a nongovernmental partner to multi-nation coalition operations
Terms of Reference
ICD/CONOPS
JROCM 081-12
90-DayStudy
JROCM026-13
MPE Enduring(Tier 1) CDP
Joining Instructions
CJCSI 5128.01
DoDI 8110.01
MPE Episodic CDP
Signe
d
Both US MPE and NATO FMN efforts originated from the same requirement(s) document generated by COMIJC, endorsed by COMISAF and forwarded up the respective US and NATO chains of command to
CJCS and SACEUR for endorsement. Both sets of leadership endorsed the requirement.
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE and FMN Parallel Efforts
“US MPE AND NATO FMN efforts are in parallel and are deliberately aligned
NATO FMN Implementation Plan (NFIP) Volume 1 NAC approved 29 January 2015
US MPE JMEI Joining Instructions signed by, US Joint Staff Director J6 on 21 August 2104
Jolted Tactics
Mis
sion
Par
tner
En
viro
nmen
t
NATO IT Infrastructure Joint Information Environment
Mobile Computing
Strategy
Conn
ecte
d Fo
rces
Initi
ative
Fede
rate
d M
issi
on
Net
wor
king
Stra
tegi
cTa
ctica
lO
pera
tiona
l
CIAV
Ente
rpris
e &
Mis
sion
Ser
vice
s
US - NATO Strategic C2 Relationships & Partnerships
Nation / Mission Partner Funded
NAT
O C
omm
on F
unde
d
Similar Tools and Processes Support BothGlobal Integrated Operations and NATO Level of Ambition
Mobile CommunicationsEn
terp
rise
& M
issi
on S
ervi
ces
Glo
bal I
nteg
rate
d O
pera
tions
Mis
sion
Thr
eads
O
pera
tiona
l Pro
cess
es
XML Exchanges
XML Exchanges
Represents Any Nation or Organization
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE and FMN• US MPE and NATO FMN born of the same requirement document from COMIJC
• MPE and FMN concepts and implementation plan documents developed in parallel with close coordination and collaboration
– Both leverage best practices & lessons from ISAF AMN federation, other missions & exercises
– Primary tenet of both: Apply current capabilities, equipment, skills, talent, and TTPs to a mission network
• #1 challenge: Coordinating national/organizational implementation policies in a “do no harm” manner to achieve “unity of effort” within a mission network in pursuit of coalition mission objectives (Goal of CE14 FPC, documented in CE14MN JMEI)
• MPE JMEI Joining Instructions and NFIP Volume 2 Instructions contain the same protocol standards, IA & Security criteria to create a trusted, protected and secure federation of mission networks and standards for connecting six partner “human to human collaboration” core services with each other
– US MPE and NFIP basic protocols, standards and trust criteria cross referenced and match those referenced and used in ISAF AMN, CE13, CE14 and AC15 JMEI documents.
– ATO* for CE13MN & CE14MN network contributions demonstrated ability to meet foundational MPE JMEI Joining Instruction and NFIP Instruction protocols, standards and trust criteria
*ATO = Authority To Operate
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
US MPE – NATO FMN Relationship
**All flags representative only – notional laydown
CJTF
CFACCCFLCC
CFMCCCFSOCC
• US MPE and NATO FMN conceptually alike• MPE (US led mission) – FMN (NATO led mission)• Federation of “REL TO Mission” mission networks model• Episodic in nature (temporary, built for mission)• Nations agree to trust and security criteria to “connect” mission networks• Trusted and protected connections made through Joining, Membership, and Exiting Instructions
(JMEI)• Nations provide their own equipment and TTP “federate” capabilities and TTPs• Partners replicate releasable, operational capabilities and TTPs within respective mission networks
CJTF
CFACCCFLCC
CFMCCCFSOCC
NS WAN
MN BICES
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Key = Managed Deliberate Coordinated Change Among Willing PartnersUNCLASSIFIED
NATO Federated Mission Networking (FMN) and US Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Discussion Points
--Overall message: NATO FMN efforts and US MPE efforts are cut from the same cloth and look to achieve similar objectives with similar materiel and non-materiel tool sets
--Two key challenges within any partner entity:• Culture change and implementation of organizational versions of MPE or
FMN concept to facilitate use of organizational DOTMLPF and Policy in a trusted peer to peer coalition mission network environment
• Respective Program Office accreditation and governmental* approval for release of organizational capabilities and technologies for use in a mission partner environment with a specific set of mission partners
• Leverage reciprocity or streamline process to obtain or to reuse accreditations and release* of organizational capabilities and technologies for subsequent mission network environments with the same or different sets of mission partners
*e.g. US ITAR = International Trade and Arms Regulation
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIEDCannot “Surge” or “Pre-determine” Trust
• Unity of Effort and Speed of Command within a coalition force requires movement of coalition C5ISR operations and activities off of national or NATO specific security domains
• Federated Mission Networking and Mission Partner Environment frameworks offer option of establishing a primary C2 mission network environment specific to a mission/exercise/training event
– Use is complementary to, not in place of, existing national, NATO, or other multi-national network domains
– Each coalition is different-- leverage common agnostic protocols, standards to establish trusted and protected connections and compatibility criteria for six collaboration services as a consistent foundation for each different coalition mission network
• No new* equipment, no new skill sets, no new software, no new services, no new people required to implement FMN and MPE Framework—just a desire to participate and adjust to mission priorities
– Partners bring own DOTMLPF capabilities -- whatever they are
– All are treated the same—as peers-- capacity and size or organizational role does not matter to security, infrastructure and information assurance accreditation teams.
– *May require additional sets of current equipment/licenses if re-purposing of existing equipment/licenses is not practical or available
NATO Federated Mission Networking (FMN) and US Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Summary
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIEDCannot “Surge” or “Pre-determine” Trust
• Most difficult challenge to coalition mission planning is coordination and adjustment of national and NATO policy implementations to establish mission/exercise specific policies
– Lessons from ISAF, CE2013, CE2014, IMMEDIATE RESPONSE 14 , CLEVER FERRET 14, AUSTERE CHALLENGE 2015, any other coalition event planning process
– Culture and policy adjustments---perform coalition mission tasks on mission network, national business on national network, business with NGOs and others on Unclassified networks
• Practice and more practice is only tried and true method of increasing trust among mission partners and reducing time to implement trusted network-enabled information sharing arrangements.
– Trust can be gained by practice and familiarity with partner DOTMLPF and Policies—practice must include training audience “6s”!
– COMBINED ENDEAVOR 2013/2014 & AUSTERE CHALLENGE 15 achieved FMN/MPE objectives with current DOTMLPF and Policies
– BOLD QUEST 15.2
– STEADFAST COBALT 15 and follow on TRIDENT JUNCTURE15
NATO Federated Mission Networking (FMN) and US Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Summary
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
You Can’t Surge Trust; Mission Partners Get A Vote
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Back Up
23
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Roles, Responsibilities and Relationship options within ANY
coalition
• Eight options for mission partner participation within a coalition event. Only one involves “joining” by contributing and federating a mission network with a “core” mission network provided by a lead HQ or any other mission partner HQ
1) Contribute own network, resourced and governed by mission partner operating with a "Releasable to Coalition Event Name" caveat. – Required: Receipt and full compliance with coalition event lead HQ JMEI documents
2) Request purchase, lease or loan extension of coalition event lead HQ network to own forces/C2 nodes. – Compliance with network provider criteria is required, assumes network provider has already fully
complied with coalition event lead HQ JMEI document criteria.
– No direct compliance with lead coalition event HQ JMEI template documents required.
3) Request purchase, lease or loan extension of a network provided by another coalition event mission partner to own forces/C2 nodes. – Compliance with network provider criteria is required, assumes network provider has already fully
complied with coalition event lead HQ JMEI document criteria.
– No direct compliance with lead coalition event HQ JMEI template documents required.
“Federation of sovereign mission networks” key tenet of
MPE / FMN Frameworks
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
• Note: Mission partners may utilize a coalition event federation of networks established to support a specific coalition event without selecting options 1-3:
– No direct or indirect compliance with lead coalition event HQ JMEI template documents required for any option below.
– Data and information may flow to and from option 4-6 mission partner representatives in a variety of different ways.
4) Embed a small or large force within another mission partner's force.
5) Send augmentees to coalition event HQ or lower echelon HQ or mission partner HQ as augmentees.
6) Send personnel to coalition event as observers.
7) Advocate and support coalition mission in world forums via a variety of communications media
8) Some combination of options 4-7.
"Releasable to Event" caveat means information is releasable to all coalition event mission partners, not just those who contribute networks to a specific coalition federation of networks!! 24
Roles, Responsibilities and Relationship options within ANY
coalition
25
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
• Eligibility: Who is eligible?– A mission partner wishing to contribute a network to a coalition federation
of networks MUST be a formal member of a specific coalition event*
– Obvious, but……. Coalition event membership is a political decision with the only requirement being a statement of support for the coalition X event task/objective in a world forum.
– Coalition event membership carries no automatic requirement to contribute either personnel or equipment.
Coalition member ≠ Network Contributor
*Event = Exercise, experiment, test, training event, operational mission
Roles, Responsibilities and Relationship options within ANY
coalition
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
JMEI
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
JMEI Defined
27 UNCLASSIFIED
Joining Membership and Exit Instructions
• Not a new idea but a new term generated by ISAF coalition forces
• Old terms: TTPs, SOPS, other named products resulting from exercise planning process or Crisis Action Planning (CAP) process
• In short, JMEI are a set of documents specific to a mission/exercise that range from technical implementation guidance to establishment of secure and trusted peer to peer communications to Mission[Exercise] CONOPS to OPORDERs and FRAGOs to political guidance to agreements between partners to Commander's Intent
• Operation [or Exercise] Orders, all OPORDER Annexes and any other document pertinent to a specific mission or exercise are a part of the collective set of documents referred to as “JMEI”
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Why JMEI?
28 UNCLASSIFIED
Non-Materiel (DOT_MLPF) and Policy contributions by NATO and Nations to the ISAF coalition are the most important contributing factors to ISAF mission success
The term “JMEI” came about as HQ ISAF and HQ ISAF Joint Command (IJC) needed to be able to provide nations [partners] wishing to contribute a national extension to ISAF AMN a consistent and repeatable package of holistic guidance and procedures
• COMISAF could not “mandate” systems interoperability for the various national C4ISR systems already in use, so the focus was on generating UNITY OF EFFORT by mandating human to human collaboration leveraging the most basic standards and technical protocols
• In addition to being able to protect and secure a network to ISAF mission policies the only other mandated criteria was to be able to communicate with other partners via six “core services”
• Web browsing, Chat (NATO Standard XMPP technical format mandated), Voice Over IP Telephone (VOIP), Video Tele-Conferencing over IP (VTCoIP), E-mail (with attachments), and Global Address List sharing
• The result was an evolution of mission technical and procedural documents from “a collection of workarounds” to a description of how to “federate” national mission network contributions into a trusted and protected federation of partner DOTMLPF capabilities and policies called “Afghan Mission Network”
• Operational and Functional ISAF documents also evolved to reflect operations as a unified coalition force vice a partnership of multiple independent forces
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Repeatable JMEI for MPE / FMN
29 UNCLASSIFIED
Exchange and Access made “Practical, Efficient, and Effective” When all Participants are Conducting Operations or Training at the “same Security Classification and Releasability Level”
NATO and a significant number of nations came to same conclusion that operating as a part of a coalition was most effective and efficient when coalition partners were equal peers within a “mission network”
• NATO consideration included coalition partnerships with non-NATO member nations
In order to leverage the “best practices” of ISAF AMN to inform establishment of a future “mission network” while retaining the flexibility to adapt and adjust to any mission or mission partner set, basic technical elements of JMEI were separated from mission specific and temporal policy driven elements
Two categories of JMEI were born
• JMEI Joining Instructions – A set of mission agnostic documents that describe a nations’ view of the basic standards and compliancy criteria necessary to establish a trusted and secure network relationship as well as compatibility of six core collaboration services between network contributing mission partners (Repeatable and consistent across MPE and FMN documentation)
• Event specific JMEI – A set of documents are generated by mission/exercise lead HQ staff and mission partner reps to address all aspects of a specific coalition mission or exercise to include partner agreements regarding compatible implementation of national security, identify and access management and cyber defense policies within a federation of “mission networks”
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE JMEI Joining Instructions Definition
30 UNCLASSIFIED
“MPE JMEI Joining Instructions contain the common “Lego Blocks” to enable more rapid establishment of trusted network relationships between any unique set of willing mission partners”
MPE JMEI Joining Instructions – A set of mission and partner agnostic documents that describe basic standards and compliancy criteria to establish a trusted and secure network relationship / connectivity between US and “coalition of the willing” partners as well as compatibility of six core collaboration services between network contributing mission partners
US objective: A consistent and repeatable set of MPE JMEI Joining Guidance across Combatant Commands (CCMD) and Services to describe minimum criteria for technical connections, IA, security, and six core collaboration services• Benefit: Services and mission partner ability to train and equip to a standard that is useful
regardless of which US CCMD or contributing mission partner is the lead or what mission is being executed
• Choice to train and equip forces to JMEI Joining Guidance is a sovereign decision—change(s) in MPE JMEI Joining Guidance managed and coordinated, not governed, among a “coalition of the willing”
• US DoD governs US train and equip processes• Content of US MPE JMEI Joining Instructions evolve in a consistent and complementary manner
with NATO Federated Mission Networking Implementation Plan Volume II Instructions• Partner MoDs govern respective train and equip processes• HQ NATO / Existing NATO processes govern train and equip processes to support NATO
Command Structure HQs
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Event Specific JMEI Definition
31 UNCLASSIFIED
Event Specific JMEI – A set of documents specific to a mission/exercise• Content ranges from technical implementation guidance to Mission/Exercise CONOPS to
OPORDERs/FRAGOs to political guidance to agreements between partners to Commander’s Intent• Starting point: Leverage and reference basic standards and compliancy criteria set in MPE JMEI
Joining Instructions [stated US goal is US MPE consistency with NATO FMN Volume II Instructions]
•Generated by mission/exercise lead HQ staff and mission partner reps to address all aspects of a specific coalition mission or exercise with mission partners under a JTF Commander lead, lead Nation, or exercise sponsor
• Event specific JMEI are the products of Crisis Action Planning or a the planning process associated with any exercise, test, experiment planning process
Benefit: Shape and drive collective DOTMLPF and Policy contributions to achieve mission objectives via generation of event specific policies, operational procedures, and technical configuration and security agreements tailored to address unique criteria and circumstances applicable to each mission and partner set• Commanders retain flexibility to shape and employ coalition force HQ and DOTMLPF of supporting
forces as they see fit to conduct operations in order to meet assigned objectives • Mission partners respond to acknowledged leadership role of whomever is mission or exercise
Commander without giving up sovereign rights and responsibilities
Risk to nation by joining XX Mission Network Federation is less than NOT joining in terms of resources, force protection, mission accomplishment
32
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Mission XX JMEI Development & Validation Flow Chart
Coalition Nations Prioritized by those that provide
Combat Power, Logistics, BOG*, etc.
MPEU.S.Components
Bi-lats/Multi-latsAllies, Partners
Systems, Applications,
Services, Operational
Processes
CIAV***
RegionalAccommodation
CCMDStandardization
Exercise / OPLAN Validation
Event JMEI
J3
Mission, Exercise, Test, Experiment,
Training Event
Feedback * Boots on the Ground**Joining, Membership & Exit Instructions***Coalition Interoperability, Assurance & Validation
Mission Partner Advance Planning versus Crisis Reaction
Systems, Applications,
Services, Mission Threads
US FMN 90 Day Study Figure 7
JMEI** MPE Joining Instructions US MPE JMEI Joining
Instructions signed by JS J6 21 August 2014
“Execution”
Mission CAP/ Exercise / Test Planning Process
33
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
XXX JMEI Development & Validation Flow Chart
Coalition Nations that provide
Combat Power, Logistics, BOG*, etc.
XXXNetU.S. HQ &
ComponentsOAR Partners
Systems, Applications,
Services, Operational
Processes
CIAV***
XXX specific tasks and objectives
FMN CommunityStandardization
Exercise / OPLAN Validation
XXX JMEI
J3s
XXX TASKORD, OPORD, EXORD,
CONOPS, SOP, CDR Guidance and
Intent, etc.
Feedback * Boots on the Ground**Joining, Membership & Exit Instructions***Coalition Interoperability, Assurance & Validation
Mission Partner Advance Planning versus Crisis Reaction
Systems, Applications,
Services, Mission Threads
US FMN 90 Day Study Figure 7
JMEI** MPE Joining Instructions
“Execution”
OAR Exercise Planning or Crisis Action Planning Process
Secret REL to XXX
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
The US MPE JMEI Joining Instructions were signed by LTG Mark Bowman, US Joint Staff J6 on 21 August 2104 • Distribution is to any and all partners• Governance and implementation within US DoD to be accomplished via DoD 8110.1
Instruction (Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Information Sharing Capability Implementation for the DoD) signed 25 Nov 2014 by DoD CIO and CJCSI* 5128.1 Mission Partner Environment Executive Steering Committee (MPE ESC) Governance and Management signed 1 October 2014
• Policy. It is DoD policy that: MPE will serve as the framework for operational information sharing between DoD Components and Mission Partners
Governance:• Internal national [US] business pertaining to training and equipping forces per MPE JMEI
Joining Instruction standards• Governance also reflects relationships and influence within a mission or an exercise
Management: • US MPE JMEI Joining Instructions are living documents with updates derived from feedback
received from implementation in coalition events• Change is via agreement, not consensus, among "coalition of the willing" to ensure coherent,
cooperative and deliberate change management process for minimum criteria for technical connections, IA, security, and six core services with as many partners as possible given sovereign decisions and political desires
• All changes deliberately made in close coordination with “coalition of the willing” contributors (Management vice Governance)
• Unilateral changes are/would be counter-productive*CJCSI = Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction
MPE Implementation / JMEI Change Management
35
CE14MN JMEIs
• Joining the CE Mission Network (15) • Policies for CEMN: PKI, Accreditation, IA, etc.
• Configuring the CE Mission Network (48)• Technical Guidance to provide trusted and protected environment needed to meet CE14
goals• Exiting the CE Mission Network (1)
• Guidance for protecting archived information post CE14• Procedures to gracefully exit CEMN federation
• CE Mission Network Membership (8)• NETOPS CONOPS, Cyber Security, Incident Reporting, IM/KM, Vulnerability Management,
etc.• Event Specific Instructions (38)
• Daily Battle Rhythm, ORBAT, Reporting Procedures, Trouble ticket, numbering convention, SCR VHF, HF UHF, SHF Allocation, Network diagrams, Tactical Data-link verification, Friendly Force Tracking systems verification, SATCOM Systems Information, etc.
• Admin (5)• Library of Terms, CE14 JMEI Structure, US MPE JMEI Joining Instructions
APAN link to CE14 Event JMEI documents: https://wss.apan.org/s/CE/CE14/JMEI/Forms/JMEI%20Grouped%20View.aspx
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Not Read, 43
Restricted, 60
Does Not Exist, 6
Incorrect, 19
Incomplete, 28
Unclear, 21
Not Followed, 77
CE13 JMEI Issues
CE13 JMEI Trends and Statistics
Participants not following, not reading or an outside restriction (technical or policy) with CE13 JMEI are the primary reasons for accreditation issues
*e.g. missing procedures, delayed equipment, weather-related problems, etc.
64%
36%
30%
17%
24%
11%
8%
8%
Compiled by CE13 C7 Assessment staffUNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
47% Not followed or not read
CE14 Assessment Trends and Statistics
Total JMEI Deficiencies
Mandatory ComplianceDeficiencies
Optional ComplianceDeficiencies
317 290 27
Optional Com-pliance Issues
8%
Mandatory Com-pliance Issues
92%
Not Fol-lowed85%
Restricted 10%
Unclear5%
Not Followed 271 Restricted 31Unclear 15
CE14 JMEI Issues
Restricted = Conflicts with national policy or otherwise unable to comply
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Compiled by CE14 C7 Assessment staff
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED38
Mission Partner Environment (MPE) “Third Stack”
Discussion
Joint Staff JS J6 DDC5I IIDDeputy Director Cyber and C4 Integration Interoperability and Integration Division
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE Third Stack Food for Thought
• What is a third stack?
• Applicable to MPE Enduring? MPE Episodic?
• “New” “Different” “Repurposed” Hardware? Software?
• Strategic communications. J3 or J6 perspective?
• Can do” versus “should do”- Priority: Cost savings or operational effectiveness of J3?
• How does it all fit together? (Data storage -- operating system(s) -- work stations – Transport)
• Who provides and sustains?
• Operational Requirements?
• Reuse of DOTMLPF? Policy impacts?
• Product?
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
“Third Stack” references
MPE Tier 1 [Enduring] CDP (21 April 2014). Foot Note 16. Figure 2 Page 7 A “Third Stack” is the IT equipment (workstations, routers, security components, servers, applications, and peripherals, etc.) necessary to establish a mission network that facilitates information sharing withmission partners. U.S. forces typically deploy with two sets of IT equipment (NIPRNET and SIPRNET) forthe conduct of operations. Additional investment may be required in the event that existing equipmentcannot support a releasable environment for an assigned mission.
FMN 90 Day Study7.0 TECHNOLOGIES SYNDICATE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Page 36)“….The study report recommends the pursuit of a hybrid Tier 1/Tier 2 architecture, adoption of specific configurations for the six core capabilities within the Tier 2 networks, adoption of a “third stack”19 of FMN-ready servers and end user equipment at appropriate echelons…..” Footnote 19: Same text as above.
7.1.2.1 Determine system requirements for a third stack capability based on mission thread requirements at appropriate echelons (including CCDRs, Service-provided CTF HQs, Component Commanders and joint forces), and integrate their requirements within the JMEI, ISAs and CISMOAs. Those units expected to fill the role of CTF commander will also include the necessary capabilities to establish an FMN core.
– Environment infrastructure by and large already in place. Any unit with CENTRIXS-”X” capability. – What is missing from most “third stacks” are warfighting tools
7.1.2.2 Deploy FMN third stacks to applicable units. [The need to deploy FMN third stacks will be reviewed once the required number of FMN third stacks is determined.]
– One “third stack” already in place for many units/organizations within DoD. – Supports in place MTs for that unit per ROC/POE. No more, may be less.
Network Design-Domain View
‘Coalition UNCLASS’
‘Coalition SECRET’
NIPRBQ
EXCON
NIE
NIPR
NIPRJTFHQ / CJFLCC
CJFACC1AD
USMCUK
SIPR
C-S
ECCMCC
SIPRC-S
Notes: 1. There is no cross-domain solution
between SIPR and BQ Coalition. Interface at HQs will be swivel chair and LNO.
2. Ground PLI will flow one way from NIE to BQ (both ways in JTE)
3. Air picture tracks may flow one way from BQ to NIE (20% probability)
4. No passage of traces / op overlays, coordination measures etc. between domains
5. Air picture integration is a significant risk
Air Picture
Ground PLI
Demo‘Demo
UNCLASS
• Any event will have as many “stacks” as participants wish to utilize in support of various relationships both internal and external to a specific event or mission.
• “Third stack” is colloquial for “Mission Network” in which operations are to be conducted. There will be an physical or virtual “stack” of equipment for each network relationship/point of presence at a given location.
• BQ/NIE 14 had four networks identified on this slide.
BOLD QUEST / NIE 14.2
12
3
4
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Generic “Third Stack” at any US locationSIPRNet Secret
Rel USA OnlyThird Stack CENTRIXS-”X”
InfrastructureDifferent Crypto but may be same switch to connect to transport. MPE Enduring and MPE Episodic
Software location for Operating Systems, services
Data Storage location.Separate from Operating system!
Today only six collaboration services with a few exceptions
NIPRNet UNCLASSIFIED [Access] Rel USA Only
Wide variety of applications, services, portals, etc., to include six
collaboration services BUT very few “Warfighting tools”
Wide variety of applications, services, portals, etc., to include six
collaboration services and most “Warfighting tools”
Other networks,
etc.
Work Stations: Virtual (VDI), Laptop, Desk Top.May be repurposed to any environment at low cost and effort.
Possible transport solution for long or short haul communication links as well as within an organization facility, base or platform
Repurpose workstations distribution per mission needs
Crypto CryptoCrypto
Crypto
CryptoCrypto
Crypto
CryptoCrypto
Crypto could be in one “box” or multiple boxes
To a user, six different “networks”, to a “6”
provider “one network”
May be replaced with releasable database(s) per mission needs
Internet
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MEC User Terminal View – AVE 1.3
NIPR
NIPR
KJ
VSE
SIPR
K
VSE
J
SIPR
CENTRIXS
ClassifiedNetworks
CLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UnclassifiedNetworks
INTER-NET
Inter-Net
Agile Virtual Enclave (AVE)
• Includes a Second Wire for Unclassified Enclaves
• Implemented at USPACOM HQ
Agile Virtual Enclave (AVE)
• Includes a Second Wire for Unclassified Enclaves
• Implemented at USPACOM HQ
AVE 1.3 is based on NetTop 2.2
43
Cross Domain Baseline V 3.8.0 - 1 April 2011
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
ACME - Episodic Capability
• AC15 Joining Membership and Exiting Instructions (JMEI)
• Policy: Collective agreement for AC15
• Management: AC15 NETOPS
• “Third Stack”: Provided by each ACME networkContribution (USA, LTU)
– Piggyback arrangements follow provider governance and protection requirements (must be a coalition member)
• Training: Per AC15 training audience and scenario requirements
• Governance: AC15 CJTF CJ6 overall,Each ACME network contributiongoverned, resourced and protected by owner
• CIAV: Embedded in AC15 planning and execution process to include “Do no harm” changemanagement
ACME
CJTF
CFACCCFLCC
CFMCCCFSOCC
44
ACME: Represents an overarching framework for AC15 to enable network contributing partners to operate at a Secret REL to AC15 level based on CDR’s guidance and agreed upon CONOPS, TTP, Policy,
Governance, and Common Standards
ACME = Austere Challenge [15] Mission EnvironmentSelf provided National SecretSelf provided National Unclassified
Self provided Cross Security Level Information Exchange Guard
USA provided Multi-National (MN) BICES
Other USA Locations
REL AC15
US HQ with JIE & MPE and NATO HQ IT Infrastructure with “FMN”
UNCLASSIFIED45
NATO Secure Access (Information
Assurance, Cyber Security and Credentials)
NATO Foundational FAS and Apps
(Shared Applications, Data
and Capabilities)
NATION
Cross Security Level Connection(If Desired)
JIE
NATION
US-Led Coalition Mission
NATO-Led Coalition Mission
NATION
US BICES-X TNENATION
Persistent Enduring MPE US- Partner
Engagement
Standing Nation NATO Command Structure HQ
Nation “X” May or may not be a
NATO member
NATO “FMN” Instance
NATION
US Command Structure HQ
Common C2 & Real-time SA
Nation “X” Foundational Services & Apps
(Shared Applications, Data, and Capabilities)
Nation “X” Secure Access
(IA, Cyber Security & Credentials)
Nation “X” National Secret Network
Nation “X” National UNCLASSIFIED Network
CENTRIXS-“Alpha”
CENTRIXS-“Bravo”
Secure Communications Between Nodes
Mission Network “Federation of Networks” Boundary
MPE Episodic
MPE Episodic
NATION “X” National
Extension
NATO “FMN Concept based “Mission
Network”MPE based
“Mission Network” NATION “X” National
Extension
NATION
CCMD
US JTF / CC HQ
US JTF / CC HQ
CCMDMN BICES
NATO Secret WANNATO UNCLASSIFIED WAN
Mission “Alpha”
Mission “Bravo”
CCMD
“Y” CJTF HQ (NATO or National)
UNCLASSIFIED
Evolving to a Mission Partner Environment
46
Policy & Governance
National Connections
Training
Doctrine & TTP
Standards
Mission Threads
Web-browsing
VoIP
GAL Sharing
VTCoIP
Chat
CX-I
CIAV
CX-GCTF
Web-browsing
GAL
National Connections
Doctrine &
TTP
Standards
Mission ThreadsTraining
Policy & Governance
VoIPVTCoIP
Chat
MPE- Theater Agnostic
VTCoIP Doctrine & TTP VoIP National
Connections
GAL Sharing Mission Threads Web-browsing
Chat CX-”X” Email CIAV-like
Policy & Governance Standards Training
some assembly required
Pre-AMN
[ISAF] AMN - Theater Specific
MPE: Provides an overarching capability framework for CCMDs based on CONOPS, Doctrine, TTP, Policy, Governance, Common Standards, Training, Interoperability
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE Operational Metrics
MPE “What”• MPE is a framework, a concept of operations. A JIE use case. MPE implementation is
represented by two or more mission partners agreeing to achieve unity of effort by joining trusted mission networks together to form a federation of networks composed of collective partner provided policy, transport, systems, applications, security, services and operational processes..
MPE “So What”• Clearly communicate commander’s intent for desired operational effects with all mission
partners• Moves the fight off SIPR; allowing US and non-US formations, information, and data to operate
in the same battlespace
• Greater flexibility in mission and task organizing to fight more effectively
• US and partners fight with the equipment and TTPs they ALREADY own and train with
• Addresses CCMD persistent info sharing requirements and JTF episodic events
• Elevates mission partners to peers and recognizes their sovereignty
• Defines the level of trust & addresses cyber vulnerabilities upfrontMission Partner Advance Planning, Training, versus Crisis Reaction
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Why form ISAF AMN?
48 UNCLASSIFIED
COMISAF concern: Information exchanged via automated multi-security level guards or manual processes was neither timely nor achieved with content and context intact --if transferred at all
• Persistent certainties acted upon by COMISAF in January 2010 when designing ISAF Afghan Mission Network (AMN):
• A coalition Commander only has limited influence over sovereign coalition forces and respective DOTMLPF-Policy after a coalition is formed
• A coalition Commander has ZERO influence over how those multi-national forces were trained and equipped prior to mission/exercise execution
• Share to Win” is more important than “Need to Know” among coalition partners which requires movement of coalition force mission activities from independent network environments to an environment in which all mission partners operate together as trusted peers
• Key objectives of ISAF AMN• Removal of policy barriers enabling sharing of information and direct collaboration between
NATO provided HQs and national forces supporting ISAF mission• Mandate only those elements necessary to foster trust and enable “Rel ISAF” human to
human communications between and across all echelons• Any existing machine to machine or procedural interoperabilities would be leveraged• A short list of key functional areas necessary to achieve ISAF mission would form basis
of “ISAF Mission Threads”, identified gaps expected to influence subsequent national train and equip efforts
49
US FMN 90 Day Study Figure 6
Specific Mission [Event] Governance Construct (Notional)
Network Contributing Mission Partners
Generic US HQJIE End State with MPE FY 13-16
(Absent any specific MPE Enduring or MPE Episodic Network Relationships)
50
NIPRNET
SIPRNET
ConnectAccessShare
UNCLASSIFIEDMPE Enduring
MPE Episodic
MPE Instance with Releasable DOTMLPF, Information and DataMPE Instance with Releasable DOTMLPF, Information and DataMPE Instance with Releasable DOTMLPF, Information and DataMPE Instance with Releasable DOTMLPF, Information and DataMPE Instance with Releasable DOTMLPF, Information and DataMPE Instance with Releasable DOTMLPF, Information and Data
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE Today
• Enduring = Strategic Levelo CCMD Phase 0 operations (can be utilized
during all operational phases)o Persistent – time not a factoro Specified mission partners (Bilateral or
Multilateral)o CCMD HQ capability for mission partner
planning/engagement/operations
• Episodic = Operational/Tactical Levelo CCMD-CJTF HQ Phases I-V operationso Temporary – time always a factor/mission
focused (exercise/contingency)o Known and/or Unknown mission partnerso CJTF HQ capability for mission partner
operations
CJCS Tank in tasking in August 2011 to “evolve” a Future Mission Network (FMN) that enables more effective coalition C2 for operational support planning and execution at a single security level
51
MPE is a Mission Commander capability for operational planning and execution with Mission Partners
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Cros
s D
omai
n Co
ntro
lled
Gat
eway
JRSS, Enforceable Standards & Common TTPsTo Connect, Share and Access
CMN
T
Agile
Virt
ual E
ncla
ves
Mul
ti-En
clav
e Cl
ient
s
Com
mer
cial
Sol
ution
s fo
r Cla
ssifi
ed
Assu
red
Net
wor
k Co
ntro
l
Proposed Bridge to “Tomorrow Land”
Training
Policy
CPN-X
EPN-X
PPN-X
Interim BICES-X
DoD
I 811
0
Com
bine
d En
deav
or
Endu
ring
MPE
CD
P
Join
ing
Inst
ructi
ons
CFBL
Net
CJCS
I 512
8.01
CEN
TRIX
S
PEG
ASU
S
APAN
TOR/ICD/CONOPS/90 Day Study
AMN FMN MPECurrent
Proposed JIE Inc. 2 & MPEFY 15-18
JIEFY 16-20
Agreeing to JIE Inc. 2 Enablers as MPE End State Vision and Incorporating them in our Mission Partner Training and Exercises
MPE and CIAV are aligned with NATOFederated Mission Networking
(FMN)
52
Training
Policy
IdAM
MPGW
TPN
CDC
Sing
le S
ecur
ity A
rchi
tect
ure
Iden
tiy A
cces
Mgm
t
Net
wor
k N
orm
aliz
ation
Ente
rpris
e O
ps C
tr
JIE E
nhan
cem
ents
JIE/MPE End State
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Joint Staff MPE Priorities
• Continue to support implementation of JROC validated MPE Enduring and Episodic materiel and non-materiel recommendations
• Agree on JIE Increment 2 mission partner and IT capabilities as the JIE/MPE standard for implementation across CCMDs and Services
− Conduct Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) on best COAs for JIE/MPE Implementation across the CCMDs
− Identify minimum standards and security requirements for cross CCMD info sharing federated operations
− C/S/A’s input on operational, technical and resource feasibility for implementation
• USD(I) & MNIS PMO continue to resource, evolve and acquire current and related JIE increment 2 capabilities
− Less CENTRIXS more JIE/MPE Increment 2 global focused solutions
− Prioritize Enduring (Tier 1) CDP requirements and expedite their implementation
− Identify IT capabilities available for rapid acquisition
53MPE Enduring & Episodic is Today’s Gap Filler for Tomorrow’s JIE Increment 2
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
MPE: Provides an overarching capability framework for CCMDs based on CONOPS, Doctrine, TTP, Policy, Governance, Common Standards, Training, Interoperability
DoD Mid-Term/End State (2016+)
Current/Near Term (2014-15)
Warfighting Network Concept
Required Mission Command Capabilities• E-mail w/attachment• Web services• Chat• Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)• Video Teleconference (VTCoIP)• Common Operational Picture (COP) – shared
situational awareness (SSA)• ISR dissemination to include Full Motion
Video (FMV) streaming• GAL Sharing (electronic phonebook)• Support connectivity to one echelon below
CJTF (Operational/Tactical)
CDS SIPR(US)
CDS/3rd
Stack
USBICES
BICES-XTNE
Enduring MPENetwork
JMEIs, 3rd Stack, CIAV, Policy & Governance Essential Elements to successful implementation
EnduringMPE
Building the US JIE End State (On Ramp to Highway)
• Cacophony of networks• Stove piped systems• Isolated information• Security challenged• Component Centric
JIE Inc. 1JIE Inc. 2
JIE Enhancements
• Network normalization
• Single security architecture
• EOC & Core Data Centers
• NIPR/SIPR IdAM
• Include BICES
• Common Mission Network Transport
• Agile Virtual Enclaves (AVE) using CSfC
• MEC & VDI (multi-enclave clients & virtual desktop infrastructure)
• Incorporate Mission Partner NWs & Interfaces
• Identity management
• Information conditioning
• Multi-enclave Unified Communications
• Application widget framework
• Higher performance networks
• Cloud services
Joint Information Environment
Share Joint Infrastructure
Data Centric Services
Discretionary Information Sharing
NIPRNET / SIPRNET CENTRIXS / BICES-X Data tagging / controls Anywhere-Anytime access
Adaptive Mission Partner Enclave Infrastructure
• Data Centric• Shared Infrastructure• Single Sign-On• Multi-Domain Security• Unified Capabilities
JIE
55UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
56
EnduringMPE
EnduringMPE
EnduringMPE
Persistent CCDR level US Centric Bi-lateral /Multi-lateral Specified Mission
Partners
Temporal CJTF level Commander centric
Unknown Coalition of the Willing
JIE –DI2E – Enduring & Episodic MPE
LEGEND
National Classified Network (e.g. SIPRnet)National Unclassified Network (e.g. NIPRnet)
National Contribution (3rd Stack); National DOTMLPF-P, IA, Security
Enduring MPE ConnectionEpisodic MPE Federated Network; Commander accepts risk, sets rules
EpisodicMPE
CJTF
CFACCCFLCC
CFMCCCFSOCC
MP B
Enduring MPEe.g. Federated
US BICES-X
West East
South
Mission Partner A
Mission Partner B
Mission Partner FMission
Partner E
Mission Partner C
Mission Partner D
MP D
MP CMP Y
MP X
e.g. Existing bi-lateral and multi-lateral
network relationships: MN BICES, PEGASUS,
CPN, other named network relationships,
etc.
CCMD
JIEConnectAccessShare
MPG
CCMD
CCMDDI2E
MP Z
MP P
MP A
MP Q
US BICES-X is an Enduring MPE
Cross Security Level Exchange “Guard”
Rel to Mission or Exercise