{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ombegov/a130/issues/24","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ombegov/a130/issues/24/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ombegov/a130/issues/24/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ombegov/a130/issues/24/events","html_url":"https://github.com/ombegov/a130/issues/24","id":113927242,"number":24,"title":"The flip side of resilience","user":{"login":"bnordgren","id":976922,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/976922?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren","html_url":"https://github.com/bnordgren","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bnordgren/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2015-10-28T21:30:09Z","updated_at":"2015-10-28T21:30:09Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Resilience is treated by A-130 from the point of view of someone unaffected by the disruptive event which causes an outage. (Customers can still get to websites or data, paycheck services still work for employees, etc.)\r\n\r\nI think resilience should also mean that certain critical services degrade gracefully for those entrained in a disruptive event.\r\n\r\nFor instance, say a Federal facility is still standing and is structurally sound, but there are widespread power and communications outages. Restoring power to the building via a generator should restore a modern office workspace: computers and mobile devices can connect to the wired or wireless network and get an address with DHCP, network printers still print, VoIP phones and email work within the building, a common fileserver facilitates sharing. Texting or IM-ing, if deemed critical, should also work within the building. Clearly if there is no external internet connection no one will be emailing, IMing, or phoning outside the building, but the facility could be pressed into service as a base of operations.\r\n\r\nTwo or more such buildings, if connected, should form a larger network island. All services should work across the multi-building environment.\r\n\r\nNote that even if the facility is not equipped with VoIP phones, a VoIP application could be preloaded on agency smartphones, laptops and desktops.\r\n\r\nOn a different all-hazards incident, say that no buildings are structurally sound. The same \"resilience package\", this time in portable form and with a heavy bias towards wireless connectivity, is deployed from a cache.\r\n\r\nFederal IT assets (workstations/laptops/mobile/VoIP phones) need to be compatible with and gracefully fall back to this degraded mode of operation. The resilience environment of different federal agencies needs to be interoperable. There also needs to be a method of rapidly inducting state and local responders into the resilience environment.\r\n\r\nFor bonus points, rather than define \"next generation internet\" as IPv6, how about let's up the ante and set a target that critical services implement Delay-Tolerant-Networking concepts. (e.g., the resilience environment is Bundle Protocol compatible, and smartphones/mobile devices can relay messages between disjoint network islands as they are physically carried around the affected area.)\r\n\r\n\r\n"}}