The Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) is an architecture framework for . The current version is DoDAF DoDAF V is published on a public website. Other derivative frameworks based on DoDAF include the NATO. The DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) Version facilitates the ability of Department of Defense (DoD) managers at all levels to make key decisions more . 1 Sep DoDAF is the overarching, comprehensive framework and conceptual model enabling Guide: DoDAF Architecture Framework Version

Author: Shaktizshura Yozshutaxe
Country: Serbia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Finance
Published (Last): 20 March 2008
Pages: 352
PDF File Size: 7.86 Mb
ePub File Size: 2.17 Mb
ISBN: 526-1-55886-389-7
Downloads: 14976
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Sajinn

One of the principal objectives is to present this information in a way that is understandable to the many stakeholder communities involved in developing, delivering, and sustaining capabilities in support of the stakeholder’s mission.

Node is a complex, logical concept that is represented with more concrete concepts. This document addressed usage, integrated architectures, DoD dodsf Federal policies, value of architectures, architecture measures, DoD decision support processes, development techniques, analytical techniques, and the CADM v1.

Product Descriptions” and a “Deskbook”. As the DM2 matures to meet the ongoing data requirements of process owners, decision makers, architects, and new technologies, it will evolve to a resource that more completely supports the requirements for architectural data, published in a consistently understandable way, and will enable greater ease for discovering, sharing, and reusing architectural data across organizational boundaries.

DoDAF has a meta-model underpinning the framework, defining the types of modelling elements that can be used in each view and the relationships between them. These views are artifacts for visualizing, understanding, and assimilating the broad scope and complexities of an architecture description through tabularstructuralbehavioralontologicalpictorialtemporalgraphicalprobabilisticor alternative conceptual means.

One concern about the DoDAF is how well these products meet actual stakeholder concerns for any given system of interest. Broad summary information about the whole enterprise e. In April the Version 1. To facilitate the use of information at the data layer, the DoDAF describes a set of models for visualizing data through graphic, tabular, or textual means.

Through various techniques and applications, the presentation of Architectural data increases customer understanding and architecture’s usefulness to decision-making by putting the data underlying the architectural models into the context of the problem space for each decision-maker. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. These products are organized under four views:.

It defines a way of representing an enterprise architecture that enables stakeholders to focus on specific areas of interests in the enterprise, while retaining sight of the big picture.

Sorry we cannot find this page|The Open Group

In this manner, the DM2 supports the exchange and reuse of architectural information among JCAs, Components, and Federal and Coalition partners, thus facilitating the understanding and implementation of interoperability of processes and systems. This Architecture Framework is especially suited to large systems with complex integration and interoperability challenges, and it is apparently unique in its employment of “operational views”.


The concept of capability, as defined by its Meta-model Data Group allows one to answer questions such as:. The sequence of the artifacts listed below gives a suggested order in which the artifacts could be developed. To assist decision-makers, DoDAF provides the means of abstracting essential information from the underlying complexity and presenting it in a way that maintains coherence and consistency.

In other projects Wikimedia Commons. The three views and their interrelationships — driven by common architecture data elements — provide the basis for deriving measures such as interoperability or performance, and for measuring the impact of the values of these metrics on operational mission and task effectiveness.

It defines the type of information exchanged, the frequency of exchanges, the tasks and activities supported by these exchanges and the nature of the exchanges.

The relationship between architecture data elements across the SV to the OV can be exemplified as systems are procured and fielded to support organizations and their operations. Workshops have brought the Systems Engineering community and the architecture community closer together in defining the DoDAF architecture content that would be useful to the Systems Engineering process, and this has resulted in an understanding which the entire set of viewpoints and the underlying architectural data can be used in the System Engineering processes.

The Systems Viewpoint accommodates the legacy system descriptions. The approach depends on the requirements and the expected results; i. Systems and services view SV is a set of graphical and textual products that describe systems and services and interconnections providing for, or supporting, DoD functions. DoD weapons and information technology system acquisitions are required to develop and document an enterprise architecture EA using the views prescribed in the DoDAF.

The Systems Viewpointfor Legacy support, is the design for solutions articulating the systems, their composition, interconnectivity, and context providing for or supporting operational and capability functions. This page was last edited on 3 Octoberat The Department of Defense Architecture Framework DoDAF is an architecture framework for the United States Department of Defense DoD that provides visualization infrastructure for specific stakeholders concerns through viewpoints organized by various views.

For the purposes of architecture development, the term integrated means that data required in more than one of the architectural models is commonly defined and understood across those models. Each view depicts certain perspectives of an architecture as described below.


The Project Viewpoint also details dependencies among capability and operational requirements, system engineering processes, systems design, and services design within the Defense Acquisition System process. All view AV products provide overarching descriptions of the entire architecture and define the scope and context of the architecture.

The viewpoints categorize the models as follows: It establishes a basis for semantic i.

Department of Defense Architecture Framework

These views offer overview and details .202 to specific stakeholders within their domain and in interaction with other domains in which the system will operate. SV products focus on specific physical systems with specific physical geographical locations. DoD Business Systems Modernization: As illustrated below, the original viewpoints Operational Viewpoint, Systems and Services Viewpoint, Technical Standards Viewpoint, and the All Viewpoint have had their Models reorganized to better address their purposes.

The actual sequence of view generation and their potential customization is a function of the application domain and the specific needs of the effort.

As one example, the DoDAF v1. In the past, decision-makers would look at DoDAF offerings and decide which were appropriate to their decision process.

DoDAF does not prescribe any particular Views, but instead concentrates on data as the necessary ingredient for architecture development. Definitions and Guidelines”, “II: Otherwise there is the risk of producing products with no customers. It establishes data element definitions, rules, and relationships and a baseline set of products for consistent development of systems, integrated, or federated architectures. DoDAF generically describes in the representation of the artifacts to be generated, but allows considerable flexibility regarding the specific formats and modeling techniques.

Retrieved from ” https: However, other regulations and instructions from both DoD and CJCS may have particular presentation view requirements. It addressed the Deputy Secretary of Defense directive that a DoD-wide effort be undertaken to define and develop a better means and process for ensuring that C4ISR capabilities were interoperable and met the needs of the warfighter. Technical standards view TV products define technical standards, implementation conventions, business rules and criteria that govern the architecture.

The term we have coined is “Fit-for-Purpose” presentation. These architecture descriptions may include families of systems FoSsystems of systems SoSand net-centric capabilities for interoperating and interacting in the non-combat environment.

Many times, these design products were not understandable or useful to their intended audience.

Author: admin