240:
in the early 1980s, with DO-178 receiving subsequent revisions. MIL-STD-2167 and MIL-STD-498 together define standard software development life cycle processes that are expected to be implemented and followed as well as prescriptively defining standard document format and content. In contrast, the
123:
published 4 June 1985. This document established "uniform requirements for the software development that are applicable throughout the system life cycle." This revision was written to allow the contractor more flexibility and was a significant reorganization and reduction of the previous revision;
163:. Although the document states "the contractor is responsible for selecting software development methods (for example, rapid prototyping)", it also required "formal reviews and audits" that seemed to lock the vendor into designing and documenting the system before any implementation began.
128:, where the previous revision prescribed pages of design and coding standards, this revision only gave one page of general requirements for the contractor's coding standards; while DOD-STD-2167 listed 11 quality factors to be addressed for each software component in the
170:(CASE) tools being used in the industry. Vendors would often use the CASE tools to design the software, then write several standards-required documents to describe the CASE-formatted data. This created problems matching design documents to the actual product.
383:
487:
332:"MIL-STD-498, MILITARY STANDARD: SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND DOCUMENTATION [SUPERSEDED BY IEEE/EIA 12207.0, IEEE/EIA 12207.1 AND IEEE/EIA 12207.2]"
407:
355:: states, "MIL-STD-2167 is the standard many DoD contractors have had to deliver...whereas MIL-STD-2168 is the DoD's quality assurance standard."
148:
245:
of demonstrating airworthiness, permitting relative flexibility in the life cycles and processes employed to accomplish those objectives.
205:
DOD-STD-2167 described the necessary project documentation to be delivered when developing a "Mission-Critical" computer software system.
467:
366:
Defence
Aviation Authority, Australia, AAP 7001.054(AM1): Airworthiness Design Requirements Manual, Sect 2 Chap 7 - Aviation Software
136:
only tasked the contractor to address relevant quality factors in the SRS. Like DOD-STD-2167, it was designed to be used with
338:
268:
194:
167:
129:
112:
62:
233:" specifications, rather than trying to determine the best processes and making them formal requirements on suppliers.
434:
315:
351:"Frameworks for quality software process: SEI Capability Maturity...", Springerlink.com, 2007, webpage PDF:
497:
404:
17:
457:
331:
209:
283:
462:
492:
370:
However, DOD-STD-2167A contains a number of notable shortfalls that were resolved by MIL-STD-498.
261:
8:
221:
One result of these criticisms was to begin designing a successor standard, which became
452:
305:
430:
311:
198:
115:
Standard 2167A), titled "Defense
Systems Software Development", was a United States
116:
225:. Another result was a preference for formal industry-designed standards (such as
424:
411:
160:
151:, and DOD-STD-2168 into a single document, and addressed some vendor criticisms.
197:
military standards describing documents and procedures required for developing
241:
less proscriptive DO-178B/C defines objectives that should be accomplished as
481:
230:
262:"DOD-STD-2167A, MILITARY STANDARD: DEFENSE SYSTEM SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT]"
193:" respectively) are the official specification numbers for superseded U.S.
137:
120:
84:
74:
222:
166:
Another criticism was the focus on design documents, to the exclusion of
144:
92:
352:
226:
119:, published on February 29, 1988, which updated the less well known
472:
426:
The
Control Handbook, Second Edition: Control System Applications
237:
97:
468:
Military perspective on replacing DOD-STD-2167A with MIL-STD-498
159:
One criticism of the standard was that it was biased toward the
473:
Military statement together with DOD-STD-2167A with FAM-DRE-231
236:
MIL-STD-2167A with MIL-STD-498 eventually became the basis for
284:"Software Development Standards and the DoD Program Manager"
212:
standard, titled "Defense System
Software Quality Program".
307:
Aerospace
Software Engineering (The DOD Life Cycle Model)
422:
479:
463:MIL-HDBK-287 A Tailoring Guide for DOD-STD-2167A
281:
304:D. S. Maibor (1991). Christine Anderson (ed.).
384:"DO-178C the future of Avionics Certification"
488:United States Department of Defense standards
140:, "Defense System Software Quality Program".
381:
303:
27:US defense standard for software development
143:On December 5, 1994 it was superseded by
14:
480:
345:
31:Defense Systems Software Development
339:United States Department of Defense
269:United States Department of Defense
168:Computer-Aided Software Engineering
63:United States Department of Defense
24:
429:. CRC Press. pp. 6–15, 6–16.
185:(often mistakenly referred to as "
25:
509:
446:
293:. Defense Acquisition University.
282:Paul V. Shebalin (Summer 1994).
423:William S. Levine, ed. (2011).
173:
416:
398:
375:
358:
324:
297:
275:
254:
147:, which merged DOD-STD-2167A,
13:
1:
248:
216:
291:Acquisition Review Quarterly
154:
7:
208:DOD-STD-2168 was the DoD's
47:February 29, 1988
10:
514:
458:The DOD-STD-2167A standard
410:September 3, 2014, at the
210:software quality assurance
453:The DOD-STD-2167 standard
80:
68:
58:
43:
35:
201:systems. Specifically:
39:Cancelled 1994 / Legacy
382:Martin Beeby (2012).
113:Department of Defense
498:Software development
32:
386:. atego. p. 3
30:
199:military computer
106:
105:
81:Related standards
16:(Redirected from
505:
441:
440:
420:
414:
402:
396:
395:
393:
391:
379:
373:
372:
362:
356:
349:
343:
342:
336:
328:
322:
321:
301:
295:
294:
288:
279:
273:
272:
266:
258:
243:acceptable means
229:) and informal "
117:defense standard
54:
52:
33:
29:
21:
513:
512:
508:
507:
506:
504:
503:
502:
478:
477:
449:
444:
437:
421:
417:
412:Wayback Machine
403:
399:
389:
387:
380:
376:
364:
363:
359:
350:
346:
334:
330:
329:
325:
318:
302:
298:
286:
280:
276:
264:
260:
259:
255:
251:
219:
176:
161:Waterfall Model
157:
102:
87:
73:
50:
48:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
511:
501:
500:
495:
493:1988 documents
490:
476:
475:
470:
465:
460:
455:
448:
447:External links
445:
443:
442:
435:
415:
397:
374:
368:, p. 10,
357:
344:
323:
316:
310:. p. 45.
296:
274:
271:. 29 Feb 1988.
252:
250:
247:
218:
215:
214:
213:
206:
175:
172:
156:
153:
132:, DOD-STD-2167
104:
103:
101:
100:
95:
89:
82:
78:
77:
70:
69:Base standards
66:
65:
60:
56:
55:
45:
41:
40:
37:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
510:
499:
496:
494:
491:
489:
486:
485:
483:
474:
471:
469:
466:
464:
461:
459:
456:
454:
451:
450:
438:
436:9781420073614
432:
428:
427:
419:
413:
409:
406:
401:
385:
378:
371:
367:
361:
354:
348:
341:. 5 Dec 1994.
340:
333:
327:
319:
317:9781600863905
313:
309:
308:
300:
292:
285:
278:
270:
263:
257:
253:
246:
244:
239:
234:
232:
231:best practice
228:
224:
211:
207:
204:
203:
202:
200:
196:
192:
188:
184:
180:
171:
169:
164:
162:
152:
150:
149:DOD-STD-7935A
146:
141:
139:
135:
131:
127:
122:
118:
114:
110:
109:DOD-STD-2167A
99:
96:
94:
91:
90:
88:Succeeded by
86:
83:
79:
76:
71:
67:
64:
61:
57:
46:
42:
38:
34:
19:
425:
418:
400:
388:. Retrieved
377:
369:
365:
360:
347:
326:
306:
299:
290:
277:
256:
242:
235:
220:
191:MIL-STD-2168
190:
187:MIL-STD-2167
186:
183:DOD-STD-2168
182:
179:DOD-STD-2167
178:
177:
174:Predecessors
165:
158:
142:
138:DOD-STD-2168
133:
125:
121:DOD-STD-2167
108:
107:
85:DOD-STD-2168
75:DOD-STD-2167
59:Organization
44:Year started
18:DOD-STD-2168
223:MIL-STD-498
145:MIL-STD-498
98:RTCA DO-178
93:MIL-STD-498
72:Preceded by
482:Categories
405:AC 20-115C
249:References
227:IEEE 12207
217:Successors
51:1988-02-29
155:Criticism
408:Archived
353:SL6-PDF
189:" and "
49: (
433:
390:23 Jan
314:
238:DO-178
36:Status
335:(PDF)
287:(PDF)
265:(PDF)
126:e.g..
431:ISBN
392:2016
312:ISBN
181:and
195:DoD
130:SRS
484::
337:.
289:.
267:.
439:.
394:.
320:.
134:A
111:(
53:)
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.