Order Code RS21590
Updated March 11, 2005
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Defense Program Issue: Global Information
Grid, Bandwidth Expansion (GIG-BE)
Clay Wilson
Specialist in Technology and National Security
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Summary
The Global Information Grid (GIG) is the enabling infrastructure for Network
Centric Warfare (NCW), a concept that relies on communications technology to link
together U.S. military personnel, ground vehicles, aircraft, and naval vessels through
integrated wide and local area networks to provide improved battle space awareness for
joint military forces.1 The GIG Bandwidth Expansion program (GIG-BE) is a
component of the overall GIG, that involves upgrading the capacity of the busiest
equipment and transmission pathways composing the central portion of the GIG. Some
question whether the GIG-BE design will support military requirements for transmitting
the expected future high volume of encrypted network traffic. Also, because each service
is developing a separate network architecture that will tie into the GIG, some observers
question whether these differences will limit interoperability of the overall GIG, and
thus reduce its usefulness to warfighters. This report will be updated as events warrant.
Background
Global Information Grid. DOD is building a Global Information Grid (GIG) to
provide a secure networking capability for managing information on demand for
warfighters, policy makers, and support personnel. The GIG will provide a single
network to enable sharing of information from sensors among personnel at multiple levels
of security in all services, in the intelligence community, and with U.S. coalition partners.
The functionality of many sophisticated weapons systems may be critically dependent on
the future capabilities of the GIG.
GIG-Bandwidth Expansion Program (GIG-BE). The GIG network design
includes linkages through radio, satellite, and land lines. The GIG-BE program enhances
the high-speed land lines which form a central core of the GIG, and which use optical
network technology. The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) is leading the
1 For more information about Network Centric Warfare, see CRS Report RS20557, Navy
Network-Centric Warfare Concept: Key Programs and Issues for Congress.
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

CRS-2
two-year GIG-BE program which will link 100 top defense and intelligence sites across
the globe through a new high-bandwidth, high-speed, 10 gigabits-per-second optical
Internet Protocol Network, and is planning to deploy network upgrades for at least 90
“central point” sites by Fall 2005. The list of these “central point” sites is classified, but
locations both in and outside the United States are included. Once the bandwidth
expansion is deployed, the DISA will next improve user services for the GIG through its
GIG Enterprise Services (GES) initiative.2
Bandwidth Needs. According to former Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Networks and Information Integration (ASD/NII), John Stenbit, the primary problem that
must be overcome to make information for NCW easily accessible through the GIG is
meeting the demand for bandwidth.3 Encryption requirements for high security for the
GIG will add considerable management overhead signaling to all network traffic and will
significantly reduce the amount of bandwidth that is actually available for conveying a
message. By the year 2010, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the
supply of effective bandwidth required by the Army will fall short of peak demand by a
ratio of approximately 1 to 10.4 Also, DISA reportedly has projected that requirements
for transmission of all encrypted U.S. military information will grow by about 50 percent
per year in the future. However, CBO has calculated that the existing design for the GIG-
BE program, which supports the core of the GIG, is adequate to support military needs
through 2015 and possibly through 2020, with technology upgrades.5
Network Architectures. The “architecture” of the GIG network includes the
design to support business functions and military operations (the enterprise architecture),
plus the design for transmission of data within each network (the technical architecture).
Each military service is currently creating its own network architecture to support
warfighters, and tie into the GIG. The key architectures are (a) the Air Force C2
Constellation, (b) Navy and Marine Corps ForceNet, and (c) Army LandWarNet.
However, many observers are concerned that interoperability problems between the
different architectures used by each military service may limit the usefulness of the GIG,
leaving warfighters unable to tap into all network capabilities.6
2 Chris Watson and Tony Stout, “Net-Centric,” Government Computer News, vol. 22, no. 30,
Oct. 13, 2003.
3 In certain situations during Operation Iraqi Freedom, commanders had access to only one
communications channel. If someone else was using it first, the commander had to wait until it
was free for him to use. Matthew French, “Bandwidth in Iraq a Subject of Debate,” Federal
Computer Week, Oct. 20, 2003, p. 43.
4 Anticipated hardware improvements by 2010 will shift the existing bandwidth bottleneck from
the brigade level to the corps level. If the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) performs as the
Army projects, the new radio may provide more than enough bandwidth for the lower tactical
levels of command, with a margin for growth of demand beyond 2010. However, at the division
and corps level, the projected demand is still expected to be much greater than the likely supply.
CBO, The Army’s Bandwidth Bottleneck, Aug. 2003 at [http://www.cbo.gov].
5 CBO, Issues Associated with the Global Information Grid Bandwidth Expansion, Feb. 28,
2005, p. 15.
6 Implementation of the Interoperability and Information Assurance Policies for Acquisition of
(continued...)

---

CRS-3
Air Force C2 Constellation. The Air Force Multi-Sensor Command and Control
Constellation (formerly MC2C), now known as the C2 Constellation program, consists
of several technical and enterprise architectures, some of which are designed to relay
information directly between machines using common information standards. The
“constellation” consists of platforms, ground stations, unmanned aerial vehicles, space-
based sensors, and possibly new multi-sensor command and control aircraft. The C2
Constellation will be one of many Air Force enterprise architectures that also support the
business process for acquiring future C2 capabilities.7 The enterprise architectures are
coordinated by a group of Air Force Domain Councils that in turn are governed by the
Enterprise Architecture Integration Council, which is an executive oversight board headed
by John Gilligan, the Air Force CIO.8 The C2 Constellation may also be described as an
approach to program management for improving Air Force C4ISR capabilities.9
Navy and Marine Corps ForceNet. ForceNet is a concept for a communications
network that combines all networks and business processes for Navy and Marine Corps
systems, so that information can be gathered and analyzed in a collaborative, at-sea-
environment. For example, naval strike group commanders can use computer network
“chat rooms” to coordinate among their warfare commanders and ships, as well as reach
back to the continental United States for help in diagnosing problems.10 ForceNet
maintains a continual state of evolution based on changes in technology and changes in
the battle space, and is not intended to have an “end” state. As such, ForceNet is not a
program or a system, but rather a way of integrating a wide array of technological
resources into a distributed, networked combat force available in real time to all
personnel.11 It is an architecture comprised of networked systems, processing and
computing, and interfaces that are secure and transparent to users.12 Detailed information
about the architecture for ForceNet can be found in CRS Report RS20557, Navy Network-
Centric Warfare Concept: Key Programs and Issues for Congress.
6 (...continued)
Navy Systems, DOD Inspector General, Report No. D-2005-003, Feb. 2, 2005; Government
Accountability Office, Defense Acquisitions: The Global Information Grid and Challenges
Facing Its Implementation, GAO-04-858; and Lisa Troshinsky, “ DOD Has No Clear Strategy
for GIG, GAO Says,” Aerospace Daily & Defense Report, Aug. 2, 2004, p. 5.
7 Hanscom Air Force Base, “Constellation” Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts, press release,
Feb. 20, 2003 at [http://esc.hanscom.af.mil].
8 Dawn S. Onley, “Air Force Working to Connect Sensors,” Government Computer News, May
1, 2003 at [http://www.gcn.com].
9 “Constellation” press release, Feb. 20, 2003, op.cit.
10 Admiral Walter F. Doran, “ForceNet Deployer,” Military Information Technology, Nov. 29,
2003 at [http://www.mit-kmi.com].
11 Rear Admiral Thomas E. Zelibor, Statement to the House Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities, Feb. 11, 2004 and J.D.
Walter, “ForceNet: Delivers Future Capabilities Now,” Flagship, Dec. 11, 2003,
[http://www.flagshipnews.com/].
12 U. S. Naval Office of Information at [http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/policy/vision/
vis02/vpp02-ch3v.html].

---

CRS-4
Army LandWarNet. LandWarNet is the Army counterpart to the Air Force C2
Constellation and the enterprise network of the Navy’s ForceNet, and enables connectivity
to the GIG for the following systems: (1) National Guard’s GuardNET; (2) the Army
Reserve’s ARNET; (3) Echelons-Above-Corps connectivity to the GIG supporting
Combatant Commanders, Land Component Commanders, and Joint Force Commanders,
and providing the bridge between the deployed soldier and the GIG; and (4)
Echelons-Corps-and-Below connectivity to the GIG supporting soldiers, units of
action/brigade, and Division and Corps elements located in the deployed theater. When
fielded, the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T), Joint Tactical Radio
System (JTRS), Transformational Communications System, and Network Centric
Enterprise Services will be integral parts of LandWarNet, all linked to the GIG.13
Oversight Issues for Congress
The GIG-BE program raises several potential oversight issues for Congress.
Transmission Capacity of the GIG-BE. Is the current design for the GIG-BE
sufficient to support future projections for the bandwidth requirements to properly secure
classified military transmissions? Do reported projections for bandwidth requirements
adequately take into account extending the functionality of the GIG down to each
individual soldier, and to each individual sensor and individual weapons system in the
future? Do the calculations for growth in GIG-BE transmission capacity adequately
incorporate estimates for future changes in network technology, future developments in
weapons design, and future military tactics?
Interoperability of GIG Architectures. Each military service is creating its
own network architecture, causing many observers to be concerned that interoperability
problems between the different architectures may limit the usefulness of the overall GIG,
leaving warfighters unable to tap into all network capabilities.
DOD officials have reportedly stated that all services’ network architectures are
basically the same network, and that once the information systems are integrated, all
military units will be able to access whatever data they need (policy and security features
will control the level of access for each individual). DOD intends to integrate all the
separate architectures using a plan known as the Joint Technical Architecture (JTA) and
the Net Centric Operations and Warfare Reference Model (NCOWRM).14 A new DOD
requirements development process, known as the “Joint Capabilities Integration and
Development System,” now requires that all technology systems acquired to become part
of the GIG must include joint operational capabilities as part of their development and
13 “Army Renames Its Network Enterprise,” Feb. 26, 2004 at [http://www.insidedefense.com/].
14 Brigadier General Marc Rogers, Director Joint Requirements and Integration Directorate/ J8,
for U.S. Joint Forces Command, House Armed Services Subcommittee on Terrorism,
Unconventional Threats and Capabilities, hearing on Military C4I Systems, Oct. 21, 2003 at
[http://www.cq.com]. Statement of John Stenbit, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks
and Information Integration, House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Terrorism,
Unconventional Threats, and Capabilities, Feb. 11, 2004.

---

CRS-5
delivery.15 The DOD Joint Staff has also created a new Force Capability Board (FCB) to
monitor NCW programs for mismatches in funding, or mismatches in capability.16 The
Defense Department is also merging its Business Systems Modernization (BSM) effort
with its Global Information Grid architecture project to ensure that all network
architecture efforts comply with GIG standards.17
However, some questions remain. To what degree are these DOD efforts to integrate
differing network architectures proving effective? Are the immediate needs of the war
in Iraq reinforcing the use of different network architectures? What are some possible
vulnerabilities as the enterprise and technology architectures of the GIG network become
more fully interoperable? Does increased interoperability also increase the potential for
unauthorized access or “hacking” of the GIG? Under what circumstances might it be
better to maintain a military communications network using architectures and
technologies that are less homogeneous? As technology evolves for attacking networks,
will security for the GIG be adequate to insure reliability of equipment and authenticity
for users and data?
15 Rich Tuttle, "New Organization to Stress Importance of Network Programs,” Aerospace Daily,
Jan. 30, 2004.
16 Rich Tuttle, op. cit.
17 Jason Miller, “DOD Builds on GIG Blueprint,” Government Computer News, vol. 23, no. 1,
Jan. 12, 2004.

---