APCO Governance Subcommittee Recommendations
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•557 views
Draft recommendations from the APCO Broadband Committee's subcommittee on Governance of the Nationwide Public Safety Wireless Broadband Network presented at the APCO Annual Conference on August 21, 2013
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to APCO Governance Subcommittee Recommendations
Similar to APCO Governance Subcommittee Recommendations (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
APCO Governance Subcommittee Recommendations
- 1. © 2013; all rights reserved Broadband Committee GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR – ROBERT LEGRANDE, FOUNDER, THE DIGITAL DECISION, LLC August 21, 2013
- 2. © 2013; all rights reserved Governance Relationship Overview FirstNet Federal Public Safety Users Tribal Public Safety Users State Level Gov. Public Safety Primary Users Private Party Secondary Users County & Local Public Safety Primary Users Federal Agencies Tribal Gov. Entities State Level Gov. Agencies County & Local Agencies Public Private Entities State FirstNet Program OfficesFED GOV ECPC
- 3. © 2013; all rights reserved APCOBBGovernanceRecommendation Matrix FunctionalRoleCategories FirstNet Governance Entity FederalAgency Governance Entity StateFN ProgramOfc State-level Governance Entity County-level Governance Entity Local-level Agency Governance Entity PPP Governance Entity Tribal Governance Entity Budget,FinancialOversightEPC/Core Infrastructure RANManagement ManagementofQoS/ PriorityServices Applications NetworkOperations& Management IdentityManagement(DB, HSS,UserProv,etc)
- 4. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE Budget and Financial Oversight Team Robert LeGrande – Founder, The Digital Decision, LLC Brad Stoddard – Director, State of Michigan PSCS Todd Early –Texas Statewide Interoperability Coordinator
- 5. © 2013; all rights reserved Budget and Financial Oversight Recommendations: Fiscal Responsibility / Budget Management a. FirstNet (FN): Overall Financial responsibility of Federal funds and spectrum, must provide transparent and auditable accounting / reporting system b. State, Local, Tribal (SLT): Jurisdictions should develop Cost Benefit Analysis to and compare that to FNs plan. Vendor Contract Management a. FN: Responsible for Contract Authoring, Negotiation and Management, Risk Mitigation b. SLT: Jurisdictions to develop process to manage vendors/services, and should include: Costs, Roles, Project Plans, etc.
- 6. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE EPC / Core Infrastructure Team Cynthia Wenzel Cole, CEO Cynergyze Joe Ross, Sr. Partner, Televate, LLC
- 7. © 2013; all rights reserved EPC / Core Infrastructure Recommendations: • Requirements Phase – SFPO would serve as intermediary to coordinate and compile needs and from State and Local agencies around interconnectivity, core network services and network evolution which directly impact Agency User • Build Phase – Using inputs gathered, SFPO should serve as representatives to ensure proposed and “as built” network meets requirements • Operations Phase – SFPO would serve as “headquarters enterprise customer” to ensure network meets stated requirements, such as those captured by Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
- 8. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE RAN Management Team Cynthia Wenzel Cole, CEO Cynergyze Brad Stoddard – Director, State of Michigan MPSCS
- 9. © 2013; all rights reserved Radio Access Network Recommendations: 1. Rural Coverage and Prioritization a. FirstNet to provide clearinghouse for information sharing- Best Practices b. Local, State, and Tribal entities to identify coverage requirements c. Inclusion of Feds in coverage needs to ensure FirstNet identifies localized or regional needs for federal entities 2. Procurement a. FirstNet website with qualified vendors and contact/contract information b. Flexible procurement options for expanded RAN development by States c. Best practices promotion for procurement (regional or multi-state contracts) 3. Planning, Coordination, and Operations, Maintenance a. Coordination between FirstNet and State’s for RAN expansion b. Managed coordination of outage schedules and notifications c. Development of state central clearinghouse for RAN issues/needs
- 10. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE Priority & QoS Management Team Don Root - San Diego County Sheriff's Department Gino Scribano - Motorola Solutions
- 11. © 2013; all rights reserved Priority & QoS Governance Recommendations: 1. Standardize the solution – reqmts, arch, interfaces, local/national control for static & dynamic parameters 2. Establish nationwide framework – policies, configs, guidelines, training 3. Establish operational governance – roadmaps, upgrades, processes, feedback, local/national roles & data
- 12. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE Device / SIM Management Team Karla Jurrens, Co-Chair Mike Simpson, Co-Chair
- 13. © 2013; all rights reserved Device & SIM Management Recommendations for device and SIM management for the NPSBN. 1. Device Certification – certification and data security 2. Device Security – operational responsibilities and policies 3. SIM Procurement – policies and vendor authorization 4. SIM Management – division of administration functions
- 14. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE Applications Management Team Bill Schrier, Sr. Policy Advisor, OCIO, State of Washington Richard Mirgon Charles Robinson, Sr. Consultant, The Digital Decision, LLC
- 15. © 2013; all rights reserved Applications Management Recommendations for governance and management of applications for the NPSBN. 1. We recommend single applications store, managed by FirstNet, with multiple “views” 2. We recommend a single set of specifications for the development of applications for use on FirstNet 3. We recommend a single central certification authority for FirstNet applications 4. Applications will be developed, and should be accepted from a variety of sources
- 16. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE Network Operations and Management Team Mel A. Samples, Public Safety Practice Manager, AT&T Vicki Helfrich, Executive Officer, Wireless Communications Commission, State of Mississippi
- 17. © 2013; all rights reserved Network Operations & Management Recommendations: 1. Standardize and Coordinate a. Operational Data b. Performance Metrics and Analysis c. User and network device names and addressing plans 2. Communication a. Policies and procedures to minimize interpretation or re-formatting of operational data shared across entities b. Common or compatible system management platforms 3. System Management Policies and Procedures a. Common Operating Picture b. Accepted and agreed, cross-jurisdiction COOP and Disaster Recovery priorities c. Agencies free to exceed requirements, provided compliance with standards
- 18. © 2013; all rights reserved GOVERNANCE SUBCOMMITTEE Identity Management Team Mike Barney - Texas Department of Public Safety Gino Scribano - Motorola Solutions
- 19. © 2013; all rights reserved Identity Management Governance Recommendations: 1. Standardize the solution – reqmts, arch, interfaces, local/national control for credentials, attributes, federation 2. Establish nationwide framework – policies, configs, guidelines, training. Trust relationships are essential. 3. Establish operational governance – roadmaps, upgrades, processes, feedback, local/national roles & data
- 20. © 2013; all rights reserved Q&A APCO International is the world’s largest organization of public safety communications professionals. It serves the needs of public safety communications practitioners worldwide—and the welfare of the general public as a whole—by providing complete expertise, professional development, technical assistance, advocacy and outreach.
Editor's Notes
- Device CertificationProcess for network compatibility testingUse PSCR or PTCRB for testingPolicy to ensure testing is vendor neutral or standardized Self Verification policiesProcess for identification of device data security policies and then compliance validationCJIS – FIPS140-2Others?Device SecurityPolicy for Device Management System for Over the Air updates/lock/wipeOpen Mobile Alliance (OMA) device management specificationsPolicy for Application protection/revocationPolicy for fixed device selection or BYODSIM ProcurementID and IMSI Numbering management – FirstNet - EBACPolicies for SIM distribution- FirstNet authorized vendor(s)SIM ManagementSIM Administration Center– Pre-Provisioned and Dynamically ProvisionedProcess vendor and user requestsBilling/RevenueManagement (BRM) system – Policy defining division of efforts. FirstNet, States, Local?
- The application store: should there be a single store, developed and managed centrally by FirstNet or a public-private partnership under FirstNet’s overall control? This option has many advantages, especially if FirstNet allows tailorable views by state and local user agencies. For example, a local city fire department might want certain of its own applications viewable and downloadable by its users, but probably would want the local view of the store not to include law enforcement, transportation and most utility (electric, water, etc.) apps. This implies a major effort by FirstNet to develop software and mechanisms for the store which can be easily tailored and administered by the local agencies to customize the “views” for that agencies users. This sort of a “local management” model for the apps store mirrors the need for local management of priority on cell sites, applications, devices and users.An alternative is to have multiple apps stores developed and administered by states and larger local jurisdictions. This model gives more control to state and local agencies, but presents a number of logistical and security difficulties, not to mention adding a financial burden for these agencies.Another important FirstNet function is grading and recommending apps. The City of Phoenix, for example, might develop a phenomenal emergency medical services application. FirstNet might want to recommend the use of such an app by all EMS agencies nationwide. Indeed, the applications store functionality probably should have a user comment and grading capability similar to commercial apps stores.Application specifications and requirements must be managed and governed centrally to insure all apps which are developed have adequate security, can appear on various screen sizes for different devices, will properly interface with device features (cameras, volume controls, etc.). Similarly, certification of applications must be centralized, because a single poorly behaving application (e.g. one which chews up bandwidth or has security flaws), presents a problem for all users on the network. FirstNet will need to develop or contract with a certification agency because no commercial network has the specifications and requirements inherent in a public safety network (e.g. security, identity management, CJIS and HIPPA, etc.)Deployment of applications presents many governance issues. First, there is a huge body of existing apps which are being used by local and state agencies which will need some redevelopment and certainly certification for use on FirstNet before being added to the apps store. In many cases such work will be performed by a vendor – in other cases the city/tribe/state app owner will need to do it. Next, FirstNet governance will need to make a decision about which apps need to be universally deployed to all devices and users. The FCC’s Orders authorizing 700 MHz waivers specified five such apps, but FirstNet will need to make its own decisions. These might include a nationwide VPN, cellular voice, Internet access, SMS or text messaging, enhanced SMS (e.g. allowing attachment of video / audio files) etc. A further question is whether States should have a similar authority to require certain apps be deployed statewide, to allow mutual aid and intercommunication by all using agencies within a state. This runs into a number of local control and home rule issues. On the other hand, cities, counties, tribes and individual agencies (e.g. a city police department) will certainly have some apps which they will mandate be deployed to every device and user within the government or the agency.Finally there is the issue of upgrades. As bugs, new features, security flaws etc. are exposed, apps will need to be upgraded. Some such flaws or changes will be so serious that they must be deployed immediately. Ideally each agency app owner makes such decisions about upgrades, but the upgrades will need to go through re-certification because they may behave badly inside the device, adversely affecting other apps which already reside in it.