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

June 17, 2016 / G C Network / Comments Off

Twitter Feed

Strategies And Technologies for Cloud Computing Interoperability (SATCCI)

By G C Network | March 4, 2009

As I alluded to in an earlier post, a major cloud computing interoperability event will be held in conjunction with the Object Management Group (OMG) March Technical Meeting on March…

Government Cloud Computing E-zine Launched

By G C Network | March 3, 2009

Today marks the launch of a new electronic magazine dedicated to addressing cloud computing within the government space. Over the last year during my personal exploration of this marketspace, I’ve…

NCOIC Plenary: Cloud Computing Working Group

By G C Network | March 2, 2009

Last week, I had the pleasure of participating in the NCOIC Cloud Computing Working Group. Led by Cisco Systems Distinguished Engineer, Mr. Krishna Sankar of Cisco Systems, the meeting purpose…

2nd Government Cloud Computing Survey – A Sneak Peek

By G C Network | February 25, 2009

This month, we’re in the middle of collecting data for our 2nd Government Cloud Computing Survey. to peek your curiosity (an to entice your participation) here is a sneak peek…

Government could save billions with cloud computing

By G C Network | February 23, 2009

In a recent study, published by MeriTalk, Red Hat and DLT Solutions, the Federal government could save $6.6 billion by using cloud computing or software-as-a-service. “Looking at 30 federal agencies,…

Cloud Games at FOSE 2009

By G C Network | February 19, 2009

ONLINE REGISTRATION NOW AVAILABLE Booz Allen Hamilton is launching its Cloud Computing Wargame (CCW)T at FOSE March 10-12, 2009 in Washington, DC. The CCW is designed to simulate the major…

IBM and Amazon

By G C Network | February 16, 2009

According to the Amazon Web Services (AWS) site, you can now use DB2, Informix, WebSphere sMash, WebSphere Portal Server or Lotus Web Content Management on Amazon’s EC2 cloud. “This relationship…

A Berkeley View of Cloud Computing

By G C Network | February 13, 2009

Yesterday, Berkeley released their View of Cloud Computing with a view that cloud computing provides an elasticity of resources, without paying a premium for large scale, that is unprecedented in…

Cloud Economic Models

By G C Network | February 11, 2009

One of the most important drivers of cloud computing in the Federal space is its perceived “compelling” economic value. Some initial insight on the economic argument is now available on…

Cloud Computing In Government: From Google Apps To Nuclear Warfare

By G C Network | February 10, 2009

Today, I want to thank John Foley of InformationWeek for an enjoyable interview and his excellent post, Cloud Computing In Government: From Google Apps To Nuclear Warfare. Our discussion covered…

« Previous
1
…
48
49
50
51
52
…
73
Next »

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.)

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

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

Posted in Uncategorized