Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve Mission Impact description #250

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 28, 2023

Conversation

j---
Copy link
Collaborator

@j--- j--- commented Jun 21, 2023

Improve text description for Mission Impact.

There's not an associated issue with this, reflects some private feedback I received about better aligning with relevant documentation.

Improve text description for Mission Impact.
@j--- j--- added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request labels Jun 21, 2023
@j--- j--- self-assigned this Jun 21, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@cgyarbrough cgyarbrough left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is fine as submitted, but have we considered the DOD's MEF definition and how it aligns with CISAs concept? I understand that the current context is CISA-based so this is appropriate. Just a question--not a show stopper.

@j---
Copy link
Collaborator Author

j--- commented Jun 22, 2023

This is fine as submitted, but have we considered the DOD's MEF definition and how it aligns with CISAs concept? I understand that the current context is CISA-based so this is appropriate. Just a question--not a show stopper.

The cited MEF documents are FEMA actually, so it's definitely a US federal civilian focus, but it's broader than just CISA.

But anyway, it's a good point in general to add additional contexts, and the Defense use case is a good one. Do you want to suggest a sentence to add in the paragraph that notes the NCF and business continuity use cases as being distinct? Just add another paragraph about the relevant DoD documentation for mission continuity planning?
Or is it sufficiently different that a defense sector couldn't use the information in a similar way?

@ahouseholder
Copy link
Contributor

@cgyarbrough check my Google digging, but I found:

MEFs. Select functions directly related to accomplishing the Department’s mission. Failure to
perform or sustain these functions, which directly support PMEF, would significantly affect the
Department of Defense’s ability to provide vital services or exercise authority, direction, and
control.

...which refers to

PMEFs. The DoD MEFs, validated by the National Continuity Coordinator, which must be
performed in order to support the performance of the national essential functions before, during,
and in the aftermath of an emergency. PMEFs need to be performed continuously or resumed
within 12 hours after an event and maintained for up to 30 days or until normal operations can be
resumed.

...and

national essential functions. The select functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the
United States during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through
COOP, COG, and ECG capabilities.

In DOD DIRECTIVE 3020.26 DOD CONTINUITY POLICY

Is that what you're referring to, or is there another definition elsewhere?

@ahouseholder ahouseholder added this to the SSVC v2.1 milestone Jun 28, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@ahouseholder ahouseholder left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems fine to me.

@ahouseholder
Copy link
Contributor

ahouseholder commented Jun 28, 2023

In the interest of merging this PR, I'm going to spawn a separate issue #255 to address @cgyarbrough's comment above about DoD's MEF definition.

@ahouseholder ahouseholder merged commit 863561b into CERTCC:main Jun 28, 2023
ahouseholder added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 30, 2023
… feature/fix-246

* 'feature/fix-246' of https://github.com/CERTCC/SSVC:
  add subsubsection header for tree versioning
  Update link to SSVC_Provision.schema.json
  Update link to SSVC_Computed.schema.json
  Update 055_decision-points_2.md (#250)
  Two small typo fixes (#253)
  Replace Utility with Automatable in Deployer tree (#248)
  Add detail about customization, tree sharing, and decision point scope (#242)
  add text to point ahead to "Information Changes over Time"
  bulletize list

# Conflicts:
#	ssvc-calc/SSVC_Computed.schema.json
#	ssvc-calc/SSVC_Provision.schema.json
@ahouseholder ahouseholder changed the title Update 055_decision-points_2.md Improve Mission Impact description Jul 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants