View
217
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
1
Joint Action Group forOperational Community Modeling
Dr. Nelson SeamanJAG/OCM Chair
Spring COPC 2008FNMOC, Monterey, CA
28 May 2008
2
• JAG/OCM membership
• Status of initiatives
1. COPC AI 2007-2.6: IA Status at DTC
2. COPC AI 2007-2.7: Requirements, timeline, and milestones for convergence of mesoscale NWP to ESMF end state
3. Status update: DTC management & resources
4. Implementation plan for IEMCO: Initial steps
Overview
3
• NWS – Nelson Seaman (Chair)*
• FNMOC – Roger Stocker
• AFWA – Evan Kuchera
• NAVO – Frank Bub
• NRL/MRY – Pat Phoebus (temporary)
• NRL 7300 (Oceanog. Div., Stennis) – Steven Payne
JAG/OCM Membership
*Term ends Feb. 2009
- Changes in JAG membership since Fall 2007 COPC shown in blue.
4
1. COPC AI 2007-2.6: IA Status at DTC
Decision Request: - Recommend closure of AI
- Is DTC’s IA plan acceptable? - Modifications requested?
5Courtesy DTC, March 31, 2008
Goals for DTC Information Assurance
• Assure community-supported software residing at DTC is protected against common vulnerabilities.
• Provide procedural solutions for software certification.
• Document certification and authentication process.
• Define limits of DTC IA certification applied to public domain NWP software.
– WRF software acquired from DTC may require further scrutiny before installation on systems requiring higher level of IA certification.
6
Strategy – Adapt DIACAPStandards to Community Software IA
Item Comprehensive DIACAP Package Executive Package
1 System Identification Profile System Identification Profile
2 Implementation Plan
• IA Controls – Inherited and implemented
• Implementation Status
• Responsible entities
• Resources
• Estimated completion date for each IA Control
3
Supporting Documentation for Certification
• Actual Validation Results
• Artifacts associated with implementation of IA Controls
• Other
4
(N/A)
DIACAP Scorecard
• Certification determination
• Accreditation Determination
DIACAP Scorecard
• Certification determination
• Accreditation Determination
5
(N/A)
POA&M (If required) POA&M (If required)
Source: PPT by Randy Gabel, MITRE Corp., 17 Aug. 2006Received from: Walt Coley, AFWA, 12 Feb. 2008
7Courtesy DTC, March 31, 2008
System Identification Profilefor NWP Community Modeling Software
System Identification
Components Vulnerability
Baseline Public-
Domain NWP
Software
DTC/MMM IA components include:
-WRF Code Repository:- WRF (ARW & NMM)- WRFVAR- WPS- WPP- MET- Others (GSI, HWRF, etc.)
-ESMF Code Repository (future)- Includes WRF science components
• Potential for
embedded
malicious codes
• Potential for loss
of baseline code
8Courtesy DTC, March 31, 2008
IA Controls – Inherited and New1. Configuration management system for version control. (Inherited)
WRF and associated software use SVN (subversion) for configuration management and version control.
2. Periodic backup of all baseline NWP model software. (Inherited)WRF code repository is backed up nightly.
3. Write/installation privileges limited to authorized personnel. (Inherited)WRF code repository has limited write permissions. Only authorized personnel are permitted write-access to the repository. Read-access is granted to a wider, but still limited audience.
4. Periodic review of code changes proposed to current baseline. (Inherited)Current procedures require review by the Developer’s Committee before code changes to the WRF repository are authorized. A full regression test is required prior to acceptance into the code repository.
5. Updates collected periodically to establish new WRF version. (Inherited)The WRF Release Committee establishes a new version Release based on new capabilities available from the community.
6. Initial line-by-line review and/or antivirus software check conducted on original version; System certified “clean” from malicious codes prior to release. (New)
A proposal has been made by AFWA to share system/software scanning capabilities. DTC/MMM would implement a source code scan as part of the WRF regression test suite. Status is TBD.
7. Future ESMF-based repository to be managed in similar way. (New)
9Courtesy DTC, March 31, 2008
DTC IA Implementation Plan/Schedule
• Identify IA officer at DTC/MMM.– July 2008
• Enhance logging/reporting data of current IA practices at DTC/MMM.– FY09
• Attend training for source code scanning tools at AFWA.– Provided by AFWA, date TBD
• Install and configure source code scanning tools at DTC/MMM.– TBD+3 mo. following training/availability of scanning tools
• Integrate source code scanning tools into regression test framework.– TBD+9 months
• Generate reports and certification documents from scanning tools.– TBD+12 months
(continued, next slide)
10Courtesy DTC, March 31, 2008
IA Supporting Documentation
• Write documentation for IA Plan – September 2008
• Maintain logs of primary IA activities
- A certification report would be provided with each major release of the WRF and/or ESMF public domain software covering…
• Code installation and update log• Code certification log• User identification and authentication log
11
• Define requirements, timelines and milestonesfor convergence of limited-area NWP codesto ESMF end state.
2. COPC AI 2007-2.7: ESMF end state
Decision Request: - Recommend closure of AI
- Does JAG/OCM’s assessment of way forward to ESMF end state satisfy COPC requirements? - Modifications requested?
12
ESMF Gridded Unstructured Nested-GridDevelopment: Fields Grids Infrastructure
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Regional NMMB: Dyn . Phys. I/O NAM In-Core HWRF HWRF/HYCOM Applications: (NCEP) Core Grid Nesting
ARW: Dyn. Phys. RR In-Core HRRR(GSD) Core Grid Nesting
ARW: In-Core ESMF-ARW (AFWA) Grid Nesting
ESMF Development Path/Milestones
Note: Milestones and timelines are subject to change. Boldface font represents operational date.
COAMPS®: In-Core I/O COAMPS /NCOM /Waves /HYCOM 1 (Navy) Grid Nesting
COAMPS® is a registered trademark of the Naval Research Laboratory.
1Navy’s use of ESMF is primarily as a superstructure for coupling models.
?( )Coupled
COAMPS coupled with…
13
Support of ESMF-Based Models to the NWP Research Community
• DTC in Boulder anticipates supporting the ESMF Framework and community NWP models run operationally under ESMF.
• User support expected to lag ~1-2 years behind operational implementation.
• WRF and ESMF code repositories will be maintained in paralleluntil the WRF repository is obsolete (no longer needed by either research or operations).
14
3. Status of DTC Management/Resource Plan
• Management Plan: DTC Charter
- Briefed to WRF ExOB (July 2007); 1st revisions added (Aug. 2007)- AFWA, NCAR, NWS and OAR agree to become signatories. (July 2007)- 2nd round of review/revision completed (Sept. 2007) - 3nd round draft distributed (Nov. 2007); no comments received.- NOAA legal opinion concluded Charter does not require formal
legal review. (Mar. 2008)- All other WRF agencies (NRL, OON, ARL, FAA) have agreed to the
4-party Charter (by email), but decline to sign. (Apr. 2008)- Charter distributed (7 April 2008) for pre-sign briefing to agency
signatories and final revision, as needed. Suspense date: 4 May.- Last step: Final approval and signing (before 1 July 2008).
• Resourcing: NOAA-NCAR Cooperative Agreement (CoOp Ag)
- NOAA reviewer comments received; NCAR responses given (2 May ’08).- CoOp Ag provides mechanism to transfer govt. resources directly
to NCAR/DTC.
Information only
15
4. Implementation Plan for IEMCOInitial Steps
Decision Request: - Does COPC concur with JAG/OCM’s planning for IEMCO implementation? - Modifications requested?
16
JAG/OCM IEMCO Planning: Initial Steps
- Grid type- Vertical coordinate- Map projection- Framework (ESMF, other)
Note – Items in purple give an example of a particular model-alignment initiative in IEMCO.
• Review IEMCO document to identify… - Model category (global, limited area, ocean, space)- Project element (e.g., align global ocean models, limited-area ensemble)- Project type (operational implementation, pathfinder project)- Source model (NOGAPS, HYCOM, NAM, etc.)- Provider & user(s) (e.g., NAVO NCEP, NCEP AFWA)- Target date (identified in IEMCO, or TBD)
• Prioritize elements & identify technical POCs
• Establish deliverable requirements for each element- Variables to be delivered- Formats & compression- Horizontal & vertical resolution- Temporal frequency of outputs
• Coordinate comms requirements with JAG/CCM- Dataset size- Delivery schedule- Cycle frequency (e.g., 4 X day)
17
Category Project Element
Project Type
Source
Model
Target
System
Provider User Target
Date
Priority
Global
NWP
Global ensemble Pathfinder NOGAPS GENS FNMOC NCEP Dec.
2009
Limited-area
ensemble
Pathfinder NOGAPS NAEFS FNMOC NCEP
Limited-area
ensemble
Pathfinder NOGAPS,
Others?
JEFS FNMOC AFWA
Limited-
Area NWP
Align CONUS
windows
Operations NAM NCEP AFWA,
FNMOC
Dec.
2008
High
Align OCONUS
Guam windows
Operations COAMPS FNMOC NCEP
Deconflict DoD
OCONUS
windows
Operations WRF,
COAMPS
AFWA,
FNMOC
FNMOC,
AFWA
IEMCO Planning Table – Draft – Part 1 of 2
18
Category Project Element
Project Type
Source
Model
Target
System
Provider User Target
Date
Priority
Oceans
Align global ocean models
Operations HYCOM NAVO NCEP
Align global coastal ocean models
Operations NCOP NAVO NCEP
Align global wave models
Operations WW-III
Ensemble
NCEP FNMOC
Align global wave models
Operations WW-III
Unified
Ensemble
FNMOC NCEP,
NAVO
Space Wx
Physics-based
Space Wx model
R & D NCEP AFWA
Physics-based
Space Wx model
R & D AFWA NCEP
IEMCO Planning Table – Draft – Part 2 of 2
19
IEMCO Implementation Roadmap
• Complete IEMCO Planning Table (slides 17-18), including priorities.
• Identify “first-guess” deliverables for each model.
• Estimate dataset volumes and schedules for first-guess deliverables.
• Work with JAG/CCM to define communications load requirements for model datasets.
• Draft a modeling annex to the DAPE MOA.
• Draft model implementation plans for highest-priority model implementations.- Consistent with modeling annex to DAPE MOA.- Similar in scope & content to WRF Joint Implementation Plan.
• Refine and complete modeling annex to DAPE MOA.
• Refine and complete each model implementation plan.
20
Questions?
Decision 2: - Does JAG/OCM’s assessment of way forward to ESMF end state satisfy COPC requirements?- Modifications requested?
Decision 3: - Does COPC concur with JAG/OCM’s roadmap for IEMCO implementation (slide 19)? - Modifications requested?
Summary of Decision Requests
Decision 1: - Is DTC’s IA plan acceptable? - Modifications requested?
22
Review of ESMF End State PlanAccepted by COPC, Nov. 2007
Proposal: Create a new ESMF-based code repository supported to user community; gradually decommission WRF repository.
WRF Software Framework:Eventually decommissioned
WRF Physics Interfaces
Plug-Compatible Physics
ARW solversolve_em.F
NMM-E solversolve_nmm.F
Module_MAIN_GRID_COMP
Plug-Compatible Physics
coupler
physicsmoduleARW-ESMF
compatiblesolver
NMM-B ESMFcompatible
solver
dynamics module
Red dashed line denotes GSD’s ARW translation path.Note – Diagrams above are highly simplified representations of fairly complex codes.
frozen
Global
Space Wx
Ocean
Wave
Land Sfc.
Hydrolog.
ESMF Framework:Supported for research & operations
23
Proposed Steps to ESMF End State*
1. NCAR/MMM & DTC temporarily continue support for WRF repository.
2. DTC & MMM establish new ESMF-based community repository.• NCEP’s ESMF-NMM-B and physics• GSD’s ESMF-ARW and NCAR physics
3. Tri-agencies provide resources for ESMF-based model codes to add grid nesting, pre- and post-processing, & other WRF functions needed by users, with MMM and NOAA as leaddevelopers.
4. MMM extends ARW as global-regional system under ESMF and supports it to research community. (TBD)
5. NCEP extends ESMF-NMM-B as global regional system foroperations. DTC supports it for research use.
6. MMM decommissions WRF-CMI repository when (if) ESMF system meets critical user requirements. (TBD)
* End state was presented as Option 3 in JAG/OCM report at Fall 2007 COPC
24
Summary of ESMF End State Plan Fall 2007 COPC
Code Support: - NCAR/MMM & DTC share support of common ESMF-based code repository.
Advantages:
• Protects agency investments in WRF CMI until ESMF-based system develops proven flexibility & functionality.
• Maintains physics interoperability, dynamics options, etc. • Consistent with NUOPC’s agreed path & links to global res. commun.• Maximizes leveraging of resources for system development and code
support/maintenance (funding and personnel).• Little immediate impact to users who want to work…
- ONLY with ESMF, or - ONLY with WRF CMI.
Disadvantages:
• Risk – Not clear that OPCs and NCAR can agree on this path or a technical design.
Recommended