2.3. Interoperability Profiles

16. Profiles define the specific use of standards at a service interoperability point (SIOP) in a given context. Profiles support prerequisites for programmes or projects and enable interoperability implementation and testing.

17. Interoperability Profiles provide combinations of standards and (sub)profiles for different CIS and identify essential profile elements including:

  • Capability Requirements and other NAF architectural views,

  • Characteristic protocols,

  • Implementation options,

  • Technical standards,

  • Service Interoperability Points, and

  • The relationship with other profiles such as the system profile to which an application belongs.

18. The NISP now defines the obligation status of profiles and standards as "mandatory" or "candidate".

  • Mandatory: The application of standards or profiles is enforced for NATO common funded systems in planning, implementing and testing. NATO STANAGS's that are promulgated shall be considered mandatory. Nations are invited to do the same nationally to promote interoperabilty for federated systems and services.

  • Candidate: The application of profiles and standards shall be planned for future programmes. The standard or profile is mature enough to be used in programmes in 1 to 2 years. This implies, that from a planning perspective, this standard or profile may become mandatory at the time, the programme starts. A candidate standard or profile shall stay in volume 3 no longer than 2 years, unless explicitly marked as an exception to this rule.

19. Profiles shall be updated if referenced standards change. Profiles are dynamic entities by nature. NATO captures this dynamic situation by updating profiles once a year in the NISP. Profile owners are responsible for the versioning of their profiles. Profile reviews are required every 2 years by their owners to ensure their accuracy and continued relevance.

20. Proposed profiles (and standards) can be accepted as candidates in order to follow their developments and to decide if they can be promoted to mandatory standards and profiles. In some cases proposed standards and profiles can be readily accepted directly as mandatory.

21. Interoperability Profiles can reference other Interoperability Profiles to allow for maximal reuse.