1. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 1
Current Status of NATO
Metadata Registry and
Repository

Lynda Dallas
U.S. Mission
XMLSWG, Chair
22 April 2010

2. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 2
WG Transformations
 Revisions in WG structure occurred in
2004
 Resulted in creation of the XML
Management Services Working Group
(XMLSWG) under the Information
Services Sub Committee (ISSC) of the C3
Board
 NATO and DISA MOU allowed
XMLSWG (under the NATO C3 Board)
to utilize a Namespace within the U.S.
MDR for the last 3 years

3. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 3
Issues Originally Raised to the
ISSC
 Status of developing an approach to identify
NATO XML Services
 “XML Services” is a very ambiguous and all
encompassing term.
 Should be defined perhaps as NATO XML Registry
Services.
 Not all of the “Big Picture” interrelationships
are defined.
 Operational Registries
 Interrelationship with National Registries,
 Federation of Registries
 Role in NNEC
 Primary Service is the Registry warehousing capability
itself.

4. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 4
 Funding for 2008 work on Registry was not approved!
 200k€ request not funded.
 90K€ in NC3B POW is enough to continue NC3A support, but not
development for the registry.
 Funded development work will focus on the Program of Work
funded by ACT for development of Operational concepts of the
registry.
 US Registry is NOT the final solution, but without funds, no
development or procurement of a NATO Registry is possible!!!
 ISSC Requested XMLSWG to develop a project plan for the future
NATO Registry (NMRR)
Background on Establishment and
Operation of Registry

5. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 5
Background on Establishment and
Operation of Registry
XMLSWG developed 4 Possible Courses of Action for ISSC
Consideration:
COA-1: Centralized NMRR
COA-2: Distributed System
COA-3: Federated without
NATO instance but with
a NATO Interface
COA-4: Federated with
NATO instance And NATO
Interface
Any COA may be:
a) run by NATO
b) run by Host Country
c) run by contractor

6. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 6
Background on Establishment and
Operation of Registry (Continued)
Technical Syndicate made the following
recommendations:
•Federation of multiple registries is required to
efficiently support NNEC.
•A NATO owned NMRR is required to support NATO COIs
and achieve interoperability on NATO operations.
•The hosting and administration of the NMRR can be
accomplished by NATO, by Host Nation or by
contractor.

7. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 7
2008 Timeline for NMRR
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
NATO-US MOU
Requirements for
NMRR
Cost/Benefit Analysis
Of Possible Options
ISSC #4
Agreed Reqmts
End 2007
2009
Funding
Approved
ISSC
#5
XMLSWG
#6
XMLSWG
#5
120 days
2009
Contract
Prototype
2006/07 NC3B
User /
Functional
Requirements
Selection of Option
and Agreement to
Request Funding
Preparation of
Funding Package for
Board Consideration
Issue Call for Bids
ACT POW
Lessons Learned
We Are HERE
and preparing a
specific plan

8. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 8
2009-10 Timeline for NMRR
Jan 09 Jun 09 Jan 10 Jun 10
NATO-US MOU
NMRR Development
2009 ACT User
/ Functional
Requirements
We Are HERE and
ACT re-assessing
funding situation
ACT funded
ACT Prototype planned
industrialization via CP 150

9. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 9
Status of NATO Namespace
Manager Position
 Official VNC post created by the DIMS in 2007
 Post advertised to all nations three times from
2007-2009
 NO NATIONAL NOMINATIONS!
 Announcement closed since no nation
indicated interest in filling the position.

10. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 10
Current Status of the NMRR
 NATO Namespace is fully functional within the U.S.
Metadata Registry and Clearinghouse and available
for additional NATO XML entries.
 NMRR is a beta prototype, funded by ACT and
managed by ACT cell at ACO and developed by
NC3A
 XMLSWG pursued the federation of the NMRR and
national registries from U.S., DEU, and ESP.

11. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 11
Status of NATO METADATA
REGISTRY & REPOSITORY (NMRR)
Documents
 Policy for XML Registration and Namespace Management
 Custodian:DEU
 APPROVED BY ISSC
 Directive for XML Registration and Namespace Management
 Custodian:DEU
 APPROVED BY ISSC
 Guidance for XML Registration and Namespace Management
 Custodian:DEU
 APPROVED BY ISSC
 Guidance for XML Naming and Design
 Custodian:USA
 APPROVED BY ISSC-Needs to be updated
 XMLSWG Handbook for use by XMLSWG members
 Custodian:ESP
 U.S. MDR VERSION 7.0 UPDATE is an annex
 NC3A Technical Documents

12. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 12
Current Status
 NATO under an extreme funding crisis.
 Hosting of meetings outside NATO has been stopped
 NC3B staff travel to support WG meetings curtailed
for FY 2nd Quarter
 ISB staff has questioned whether NATO requires its
own registry, yet acknowledges a registry is a bedrock
of net centricity
 Some NATO organizations questioning the expense of
implementation of net centricity

13. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 13
NC3A Funding Cuts
Impact of cuts to NC3A funding to the
XMLSWG
 Chair of the Technical Advisory Syndicate
 Technical Analyses Documents
 Federation Specification
 Administrative NMRR User Requirements
 Administrative NMRR Functional Requirements
 Administrative NMRR Architecture and Design
 Development of the ACT-sponsored beta prototype-
NMRR

14. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 14
Namespace Management
 NATO Namespace Manager
 LTC Robert Hunt
 NC3 Staff, ISB Division
 VC to the XMLSWG
 Namespace Managers’ Forum
 Syndicate of the XMLSWG
 Chair-Greek Delegate to the XMLSWG
 NMRR Administrator-Ms. Georgina Beck, ACT

15. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 15
Meeting Schedules
 11th Meeting of the XMLSWG, 4-7 May 2010 at
NATO HQ, Brussels, Belgium.
 Including Technical Syndicate and Namespace Managers’
Forum
 12th Meeting of the XMLSWG 13-16 Sep 2010 in
Athens, Greece
 Location subject to NATO budget constraints

16. NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 16
ISSC (SC/5) - Questions
16
050121-CDB-19
Questions?Questions?