Networking the Cloud for IoT – Pt 3 Cloud Network Systems Engineering

June 17, 2016 / G C Network / Comments Off on Networking the Cloud for IoT – Pt 3 Cloud Network Systems Engineering

Packing My Bags For Prague and Dimension Data #Perspectives2015

By G C Network | May 15, 2015

Prague is a beautiful city!  My last time was in June 2010 when Jeremy Geelan invited me to speak at CloudExpo Europe (see my blog post and video from that…

SAP/HANA Does Big Data for National Security

By G C Network | May 13, 2015

Carmen Krueger, SAP NS2 SVP & GM While SAP is globally renowned as a provider of enterprise management software, the name is hardly ever associated with the spooky world of…

Be future ready: Selling to millennials and a marketplace of one

By G C Network | May 12, 2015

There is almost a deafening discussion going on about the self-centeredness of today’s young adults. Weather you call them Generation Y, millennials or twenty-somethings, the general refrain seems to be…

Surviving an Environment of IT Change

By G C Network | May 8, 2015

  “The Federal government today is in the midst of a revolution. The revolution is challenging the norms of government by introducing new ways of serving the people. New models…

OmniTI and GovCloud Join Forces to Provide Cloud-based Services

By G C Network | May 5, 2015

FULTON, Md.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–OmniTI, a leading provider of web infrastructures and applications for companies that require scalable, high-performance, mission critical solutions, today announced that it has partnered with GovCloud Network, LLC…

Cloud microservices make their play

By G C Network | April 29, 2015

 by Kevin L. Jackson Cloud computing seems destined to be the way enterprises will use information technology. The drastic cost reductions and impressive operational improvements make the transition an unstoppable trend.…

Tweeps Are People Too!!

By G C Network | April 25, 2015

I woke up this morning to the devastating news about the earthquake in Nepal. Sitting here in California  that destruction is literally on the other side of the world but…

The CISO role in cybersecurity: Solo or team sport?

By G C Network | April 14, 2015

The average length of time in the commercial sector between a network security breach and when the detection of that breach is more than 240 days, according to Gregory Touhill, deputy…

Setting standards for IoT can capitalize on future growth

By G C Network | March 30, 2015

by Melvin Greer Managing Director Greer Institute for Leadership and Innovation The adoption of Internet of Things (IoT) appears to be unquestioned. Advances in wearables and sensors are strategic to…

Women in tech: Meet the trailblazers of STEM equality

By G C Network | March 19, 2015

By Sandra K. Johnson CEO, SKJ Visioneering, LLC   Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) professionals are drivers of innovation,creativity and invention. STEM disciplines are significant drivers of economies worldwide,…

Dwight Bues & Kevin Jackson

(This is Part 3 of a three part series that addresses the need for a systems engineering approach to IoT and cloud network design.  Networking the Cloud for IoT – Pt. 1: IoT and the Government , Networking the Cloud for IoT – Pt. 2 Stressing the Cloud )


The Case For Cloud Network Systems Engineering

IoT networking requirements are vastly different from those supported by today’s cloud network. The processing and transport levels are multiple orders of magnitude higher than ever seen before. More importantly though, societal economic and the safety ramifications of making mistakes during this transition are off the scale. This is why system engineering of the cloud computing network is now an immediate global imperative.

System engineering has many different aspects, but it all starts with the question, “What do I really want to know?” This is the beginning of the CONOPSdocument referenced earlier. This document captures User Needs which are formal statements of what the user wants from the system. This CONOPS leads to Derived Requirements which, through an iterative process, are analyzed against a Target Architecture. Once a project is underway, methods of Integration are planned in order to provide Validation(did we build the right system?) and Verification (did we build the system right?) of the requirements. Further considerations for SE include: how to conduct Peer Reviews of a design (either Systems, Hardware, or Software), studying Defects, and establishing processes to ensure the Qualityof the final product and Compliance with Standards.


While multiple sources indicate that the business world is investing heavily in the IoT, there are no indication that these investments are addressing the question of what does society really want to know in the IoT world. To ensure success, design formality is necessary, lest “IoT” become the latest retired buzzword. Dr. Juran, in Juran on Leadership for Quality, makes the point that quality improvement programs failed because leadership assigned vague goals and responsibilities, while failing to commit resources to staff projects and reward achievements. This caused TQM, 6 Sigma, and the like to be relegated to the “dustbin” of quality programs. Is it wise to relive this error in our transition to IoT?

Ten Steps of Design Rigor

Jay Thomas in the Embedded Magazine article “Software Standards 101: Tracing Code to Requirements,” opined that the embedded industry standard for making systems safe or secure include:

  • Performing a safety or security assessment;
  • Determining a target system failure rate;
  • Using the target system failure rate to determine the appropriate level of development rigor;
  • Using a formal requirements capture process;
  • Creating software that adheres to an appropriate coding standard;
  • Tracing all code back to their source requirements;
  • Developing all software and system test cases based on requirements;
  • Tracing test cases to requirements;
  • Using coverage analysis to test completeness against both requirements and code; and
  • For certification, collect and collate the process artifacts required to demonstrate that an appropriate level of rigor has been maintained.”


    Using this model, security issues must be addressed through a multi-layered approach.  From a system engineering point of view, users must be forced to implement complex passwords and Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) certifications must be a minimum requirement for operating across the IoT network. The article, “How to protect Wearable Devices Against Cyberattacks,” in IEEE Roundup online magazine, postulated that, where there are devices with limited functionality, they can be linked to the user’s smartphone, which can act as a conduit for the device’s information, thus securing it from the outside world.  Most importantly of all, though, is ensuring that the proper amount of Systems Engineering design rigor has been exercised in the development process. This makes defects easier to find and much less costly than a multimillion-dollar security breach.

    Although it would be simply impossible to implement this type of rigor globally across the cloud and its underlying network, embedded systems tenets could be applied to individual IoT projects. Since embedded systems also have a history of low development overhead, minimal memory or storage per unit, and cost-driven development cycles, a more rigorous IoT design process may save society from seeing a collapse of the cloud. In the past, this type of design rigor has paid off in successful, maintainable designs. Let’s therefore use what we’ve learned from the past to avoid a future that none of us want to see.
     

    　

    Dwight Bues, of Engility Corp., is a Georgia Tech Computer Engineer with 30+ years’ experience in computer hardware, software, and systems and interface design. He has worked in Power Generation, Communications, RF, Command/Control, and Test Systems. Dwight is a Certified Scrum Master and teaches courses in Architecture, Requirements, and IVV&T. He is also a certified Boating Safety instructor with the Commonwealth of Virginia and the United States Power Squadrons. He is currently working several STEM projects, sponsoring teams for competitions in the Aerospace Industries Association’s (AIA) Team America Rocketry Challenge (TARC) and the Robotics Education and Competition Foundation’s, Vex Skyrise Robotics Challenge.

    Kevin L. Jackson is a globally recognized cloud computing expert, a cloud computing and cybersecurity Thought Leader for Dell and IBM and Founder/Author of the award winning “Cloud Musings” blog. Mr. Jackson has also been recognized as a “Top 100 Cybersecurity Influencer and Brand” by Onalytica (2015), a Huffington Post “Top 100 Cloud Computing Experts on Twitter” (2013), a “Top 50 Cloud Computing Blogger for IT Integrators” by CRN (2015) and a “Top 5 Must Read Cloud Blog” by BMC Software (2015). His first book, “GovCloud: Cloud Computing for the Business of Government” was published by Government Training Inc. and released in March 2011. His next publication, “Practical Cloud Security: A Cross Industry View”, will be released by Taylor & Francis in the spring of 2016

    ( This content is being syndicated through multiple channels. The opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent the views of GovCloud Network, GovCloud Network Partners or any other corporation or organization.)

    Cloud Musings

    ( Thank you. If you enjoyed this article, get free updates by email or RSS – © Copyright Kevin L. Jackson 2015)

    Follow me at https://Twitter.com/Kevin_Jackson
    Posted in

    G C Network

    Cloud Computing

    Cybersecurity