From tomg at aiaa.org Fri Mar 7 17:18:54 2014 From: tomg at aiaa.org (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Tue Mar 11 14:55:22 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] New CESG Polls Message-ID: Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//Microsoft Corporation//Outlook 14.0 MIMEDIR//EN VERSION:2.0 METHOD:PUBLISH X-MS-OLK-FORCEINSPECTOROPEN:TRUE BEGIN:VEVENT CATEGORIES:Orange Category CLASS:PUBLIC CREATED:20140307T221639Z DESCRIPTION:- CESG-P-2014-03-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 133.1-B-2 Cor. 2 \, Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 133.1-B-2\, Issued October 2009\n- CES G-P-2014-03-002 Approval to publish CCSDS 702.1-B-1 Cor. 1\, Technical Cor rigendum 1 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1\, issued September 2012\n- CESG-P-2014-03-00 3 Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1\, Next Generation Uplink (Green Book \, Issue 1)\n- CESG-P-2014-03-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3\, Ov erview of Space Communications Protocols (Green Book\, Issue 3)\n DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20140322 DTSTAMP:20140307T221639Z DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20140321 LAST-MODIFIED:20140307T221639Z PRIORITY:5 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-us:CESG Poll Closure TRANSP:TRANSPARENT UID:040000008200E00074C5B7101A82E00800000000D07ADAF6283ACF01000000000000000 010000000C16E59F785076944991FC31840D18D1F X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

- \; \; \; \; \; \; CESG-P-2014-03-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 133.1-B-2 Cor. 2\, Technica l Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 133.1-B-2\, Issued October 2009

\n\n

- \; \; \; \; \; \; CESG-P-2014-03-002 Approval to publish CCSD S 702.1-B-1 Cor. 1\, Technical Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1\, issued S eptember 2012

\n\n

~~- \; \; \; \; \; \; CESG-P-2014- 03-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1\, Next Generation Uplink (Green Book\, Issue 1)~~

\n\n
- \; \; \; \;&nbs p\; \; CESG-P-20 14-03-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3\, Overview of Space Communic ations Protocols (Green Book\, Issue 3)
\n\n\n X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:FREE X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1 X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE X-MS-OLK-CONFTYPE:0 BEGIN:VALARM TRIGGER:-PT1080M ACTION:DISPLAY DESCRIPTION:Reminder END:VALARM END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR From ccsds_techsupport at aiaa.org Tue Mar 11 13:28:02 2014 From: ccsds_techsupport at aiaa.org (ccsds techsupport) Date: Tue Mar 11 14:57:49 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Result of Recent CMC Poll closing 28 February 2014 Message-ID: CMC E-Poll Identifier: CMC-P-2014-02-005 Approval of New Projects and Charter Update for SLS - 5.02 Space Link Coding and Synchronization Working Group Results of CMC poll beginning 14 February 2014 and ending 28 February 2014: ADOPT: 6 (85%) (CNSA, DLR, ESA, FSA, INPE, JAXA) ADOPT PROVISIONALLY: 1 (15%) (CNES) REJECT: 0 (0%) REJECT WITH COMMENTS: 0 (0%) CNES (Provision)- - LDPC slicing and NGU coding are proposed with two prototypes by NASA ; please confirm those are planned to be independent developments and provide some details, as available. It is anticipated no patent issue with LDPC while there is a patent : has the case of this evolution (slicing) been already addressed ? DLR (Comment Only) - The timing for Next Generation Uplink Coding is far to optimistic from a DLR point of view, please rethink the book planning Results are based on responses from 7 out of 11 members (63.63%). No response was received from the following Agencies: ASI CSA NASA UKSA Secretariat Interpretation of Results: Adopted with Provisions Resulting CMC Resolution: CMC-R-2014-02-006 Inferred Secretariat Action: Approve Projects and Charter once Provisions are met From thomas.gannett at tgannett.net Tue Mar 11 15:43:17 2014 From: thomas.gannett at tgannett.net (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Tue Mar 11 15:43:44 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls Message-ID: <531f7585.461ce00a.5db0.ffff8b09@mx.google.com> Dear CESG members, The message below, which was sent last Friday (March 7) but which appears not to have been delivered until today (March 11), states an erroneous closure date for the subject polls. The correct closure date is 21 March 2014 (the calendar reminder attached to the original message is correct). Considering that, as a consequence of the late delivery of the announcement, the polling period has technically been reduced by as many days as delivery of the message was delayed, an argument could be made for extending the polls. Any requests for extension must include cesg@mailman.ccsds.org in the TO field. Regards, Tom Gannett At 06:18 PM 3/7/2014, CCSDS Secretariat wrote: >Dear CESG Members, > >Four new CESG polls have been posted to the CWE: > >- CESG-P-2014-03-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 133.1-B-2 Cor. 2, >Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 133.1-B-2, Issued October 2009 >- CESG-P-2014-03-002 Approval to publish CCSDS 702.1-B-1 Cor. 1, >Technical Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1, issued September 2012 >- CESG-P-2014-03-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1, Next >Generation Uplink (Green Book, Issue 1) >- CESG-P-2014-03-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3, Overview >of Space Communications Protocols (Green Book, Issue 3) > >These polls can be accessed via the following link: > >http://public.ccsds.org/sites/cwe/cesg/Polls/default.aspx > >The closure date for these polls is 24 May 2013. > >NOTE TO CC RECIPIENTS: Only Area Directors and Deputy Area >Directors vote on CESG polls. / -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140311/14dceed1/attachment.htm From peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov Tue Mar 11 16:03:56 2014 From: peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov (Shames, Peter M (312G)) Date: Tue Mar 11 16:03:48 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls In-Reply-To: <531f7585.461ce00a.5db0.ffff8b09@mx.google.com> References: <531f7585.461ce00a.5db0.ffff8b09@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Requesting a poll of four documents with less than 2 weeks of lead time is just not acceptable. As much as I would like to see these porogress I think at least 3 weeks is needed. Please extend the poll until at least 28 March. Regards, Peter From: Tom Gannett > Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:43 PM To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec > Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All > Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls Dear CESG members, The message below, which was sent last Friday (March 7) but which appears not to have been delivered until today (March 11), states an erroneous closure date for the subject polls. The correct closure date is 21 March 2014 (the calendar reminder attached to the original message is correct). Considering that, as a consequence of the late delivery of the announcement, the polling period has technically been reduced by as many days as delivery of the message was delayed, an argument could be made for extending the polls. Any requests for extension must include cesg@mailman.ccsds.org in the TO field. Regards, Tom Gannett At 06:18 PM 3/7/2014, CCSDS Secretariat wrote: Dear CESG Members, Four new CESG polls have been posted to the CWE: - CESG-P-2014-03-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 133.1-B-2 Cor. 2, Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 133.1-B-2, Issued October 2009 - CESG-P-2014-03-002 Approval to publish CCSDS 702.1-B-1 Cor. 1, Technical Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1, issued September 2012 - CESG-P-2014-03-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1, Next Generation Uplink (Green Book, Issue 1) - CESG-P-2014-03-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3, Overview of Space Communications Protocols (Green Book, Issue 3) These polls can be accessed via the following link: http://public.ccsds.org/sites/cwe/cesg/Polls/default.aspx The closure date for these polls is 24 May 2013. NOTE TO CC RECIPIENTS: Only Area Directors and Deputy Area Directors vote on CESG polls. / -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140311/1f9e364f/attachment.htm From Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int Wed Mar 12 03:43:35 2014 From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int (Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int) Date: Wed Mar 12 03:43:31 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls In-Reply-To: References: <531f7585.461ce00a.5db0.ffff8b09@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <25398_1394613818_53201E3A_25398_18186_1_OF4E5C21EB.15E6C3E2-ONC1257C99.002E3F9D-C1257C99.002FEF92@esa.int> Peter, I understand your complaint. I support your request, however please keep also in mind that two out of four are corrigenda, My only recommendation is to keep a deadline that will allow comments (specially for the two green books) to be available before the Springs meeting to allow (if required) announcement and proper involvement in the discussion of the relevant WG members. Note that for CESG-P-2014-03-004 (Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3, Overview of Space Communications Protocols - Green Book, Issue 3) the responsible WG is SLS-SLP but coordination with other WGs in SLA may be required. (*) Note also that for CESG-P-2014-03-003 (Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1, Next Generation Uplink - Green Book, Issue 1) there is no NGU WG Meeting planned so it is likely the matter will have to be discussed at the Joint RFM/C&S/SLP/NGU/OCM. Having said this, I think that Friday 28 March is really the last useful date, but an intermediate occurrence would be more practical specially in case of "serious" comments. Therefore, if acceptable to everybody, I would proposed a deadline a little earlier as e.g, Tuesday 25 March or Wednesday 26 March. Best regards Gian Paolo (*) Just to prevent comments, note that this occurrence of the books only refers to approved standards, therefore it shall be clear that - DTN approved standards - Optical Communication Standards when approved, will be future subjects for Issue 4. From: "Shames, Peter M (312G)" To: CCSDS Secretariat , "cesg@mailman.ccsds.org" , Cc: "cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org" Date: 11/03/2014 22:04 Subject: Re: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls Sent by: cesg-all-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org Requesting a poll of four documents with less than 2 weeks of lead time is just not acceptable. As much as I would like to see these porogress I think at least 3 weeks is needed. Please extend the poll until at least 28 March. Regards, Peter From: Tom Gannett Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:43 PM To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All < cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org> Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls Dear CESG members, The message below, which was sent last Friday (March 7) but which appears not to have been delivered until today (March 11), states an erroneous closure date for the subject polls. The correct closure date is 21 March 2014 (the calendar reminder attached to the original message is correct). Considering that, as a consequence of the late delivery of the announcement, the polling period has technically been reduced by as many days as delivery of the message was delayed, an argument could be made for extending the polls. Any requests for extension must include cesg@mailman.ccsds.org in the TO field. Regards, Tom Gannett At 06:18 PM 3/7/2014, CCSDS Secretariat wrote: Dear CESG Members, Four new CESG polls have been posted to the CWE: - CESG-P-2014-03-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 133.1-B-2 Cor. 2, Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 133.1-B-2, Issued October 2009 - CESG-P-2014-03-002 Approval to publish CCSDS 702.1-B-1 Cor. 1, Technical Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1, issued September 2012 - CESG-P-2014-03-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1, Next Generation Uplink (Green Book, Issue 1) - CESG-P-2014-03-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3, Overview of Space Communications Protocols (Green Book, Issue 3) These polls can be accessed via the following link: http://public.ccsds.org/sites/cwe/cesg/Polls/default.aspx The closure date for these polls is 24 May 2013. NOTE TO CC RECIPIENTS: Only Area Directors and Deputy Area Directors vote on CESG polls. / _______________________________________________ CESG-all mailing list CESG-all@mailman.ccsds.org http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg-all This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140312/b6e815bf/attachment.html From peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov Wed Mar 12 10:14:05 2014 From: peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov (Shames, Peter M (312G)) Date: Wed Mar 12 10:13:59 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls In-Reply-To: <25398_1394613818_53201E3A_25398_18186_1_OF4E5C21EB.15E6C3E2-ONC1257C99.002E3F9D-C1257C99.002FEF92@esa.int> References: <531f7585.461ce00a.5db0.ffff8b09@mx.google.com> <25398_1394613818_53201E3A_25398_18186_1_OF4E5C21EB.15E6C3E2-ONC1257C99.002E3F9D-C1257C99.002FEF92@esa.int> Message-ID: Gippo, I understand your concerns and could agree to a ed due date, but not earlier. In your notes you said something really cryptic about: note that this occurrence of the books only refers to approved standards, therefore it shall be clear that - DTN approved standards - Optical Communication Standards when approved, will be future subjects for Issue 4. Sorry, but I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in reference to those books and "Issue 4". Just what were you trying to say? Regards, Peter From: Gian Paolo Calzolari > Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:43 AM To: Peter Shames > Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec >, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All >, "cesg-all-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org" >, Tom Gannett > Subject: Re: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls Peter, I understand your complaint. I support your request, however please keep also in mind that two out of four are corrigenda, My only recommendation is to keep a deadline that will allow comments (specially for the two green books) to be available before the Springs meeting to allow (if required) announcement and proper involvement in the discussion of the relevant WG members. Note that for CESG-P-2014-03-004 (Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3, Overview of Space Communications Protocols - Green Book, Issue 3) the responsible WG is SLS-SLP but coordination with other WGs in SLA may be required. (*) Note also that for CESG-P-2014-03-003 (Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1, Next Generation Uplink - Green Book, Issue 1) there is no NGU WG Meeting planned so it is likely the matter will have to be discussed at the Joint RFM/C&S/SLP/NGU/OCM. Having said this, I think that Friday 28 March is really the last useful date, but an intermediate occurrence would be more practical specially in case of "serious" comments. Therefore, if acceptable to everybody, I would proposed a deadline a little earlier as e.g, Tuesday 25 March or Wednesday 26 March. Best regards Gian Paolo (*) Just to prevent comments, note that this occurrence of the books only refers to approved standards, therefore it shall be clear that - DTN approved standards - Optical Communication Standards when approved, will be future subjects for Issue 4. From: "Shames, Peter M (312G)" > To: CCSDS Secretariat >, "cesg@mailman.ccsds.org" >, Cc: "cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org" > Date: 11/03/2014 22:04 Subject: Re: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls Sent by: cesg-all-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org ________________________________ Requesting a poll of four documents with less than 2 weeks of lead time is just not acceptable. As much as I would like to see these porogress I think at least 3 weeks is needed. Please extend the poll until at least 28 March. Regards, Peter From: Tom Gannett > Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:43 PM To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec > Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All > Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: New CESG Polls Dear CESG members, The message below, which was sent last Friday (March 7) but which appears not to have been delivered until today (March 11), states an erroneous closure date for the subject polls. The correct closure date is 21 March 2014 (the calendar reminder attached to the original message is correct). Considering that, as a consequence of the late delivery of the announcement, the polling period has technically been reduced by as many days as delivery of the message was delayed, an argument could be made for extending the polls. Any requests for extension must include cesg@mailman.ccsds.org in the TO field. Regards, Tom Gannett At 06:18 PM 3/7/2014, CCSDS Secretariat wrote: Dear CESG Members, Four new CESG polls have been posted to the CWE: - CESG-P-2014-03-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 133.1-B-2 Cor. 2, Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 133.1-B-2, Issued October 2009 - CESG-P-2014-03-002 Approval to publish CCSDS 702.1-B-1 Cor. 1, Technical Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1, issued September 2012 - CESG-P-2014-03-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1, Next Generation Uplink (Green Book, Issue 1) - CESG-P-2014-03-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3, Overview of Space Communications Protocols (Green Book, Issue 3) These polls can be accessed via the following link: http://public.ccsds.org/sites/cwe/cesg/Polls/default.aspx The closure date for these polls is 24 May 2013. NOTE TO CC RECIPIENTS: Only Area Directors and Deputy Area Directors vote on CESG polls. / _______________________________________________ CESG-all mailing list CESG-all@mailman.ccsds.org http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg-all This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140312/8b7db965/attachment.htm From ccsds_techsupport at aiaa.org Thu Mar 13 13:44:18 2014 From: ccsds_techsupport at aiaa.org (ccsds techsupport) Date: Thu Mar 13 13:48:48 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] REMINDER #2: CCSDS Spring 2014 Technical Meetings Agenda Request - Requires Your Input Message-ID: Dear Chairs and Area Directors, If your Agenda is not currently posted to the website, then please provide it to us at your earliest convenience. Thanks, --Laura Stafford CCSDS IT Tech Support From: > Date: Thursday, February 27, 2014 at 5:45 PM To: "cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org" > Subject: CCSDS Spring 2014 Technical Meetings Agenda Request - Requires Your Input Dear Chairs and Area Directors, The Agendas webpage for the CCSDS Spring 2014 Technical Meetings held in Noordwijkerhout, Netherlands requires your input. http://public.ccsds.org/meetings/2014Spring/2014SpringAgendas.aspx As an Area Director, WG, SIG, or BOF Chairman it is your responsibility to keep an updated agenda for your meeting(s) loaded at the CCSDS website. Send your agendas (or e-mail us your agenda URL in the CWE) to CCSDS Techsupport (mailto:ccsds_techsupport@aiaa.org). Thanks, --Laura Stafford CCSDS IT Tech Support -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140313/52929e12/attachment.htm From marc.blanchet at viagenie.ca Fri Mar 14 08:44:27 2014 From: marc.blanchet at viagenie.ca (Marc Blanchet) Date: Fri Mar 14 08:44:24 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] SANA presence during CCSDS, NL Message-ID: <91AF3ED3-9FF8-4E06-8E73-D1D6E934348E@viagenie.ca> Hello, If you need to meet SANA or to have SANA participate in wg discussions during CCSDS, NL, please contact me directly to arrange the scheduling. Regards, Marc Space Assigned Numbers Authority From tomg at aiaa.org Fri Mar 14 15:40:07 2014 From: tomg at aiaa.org (CCSDS Rapporteur) Date: Fri Mar 14 16:47:00 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] CCSDS Review of CCSDS 522.1-R-3, Mission Operations Monitor & Control Services Message-ID: <45412c99-d7ec-44ac-8b64-be81d5fc817d@AIAASWMLEXCH010.hq.ad.aiaa.org> Control Number: PRP 14-05 The following draft CCSDS Recommended Standard has been placed on line for CCSDS Agency review: CCSDS 522.1-R-3. Mission Operations Monitor & Control Services. Red Book. March 2014. DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: This draft Recommended Standard defines the Mission Operations Monitor and Control services in conformance with the service framework specified in the Mission Operations Services Concept Green Book (CCSDS 520.0-G-2). The current draft reflects changes resulting from the previous review. The due date for receipt of review comments by the Review Coordinator is 2014-5-31. Area Directors and WG/BOF Chairs may submit review comments directly to the CCSDS Review Coordinator. More information is available at the Web site identified below. The review document, in Portable Document Format (PDF), and associated review materials are available for downloading at the following location: http://public.ccsds.org/review/ NOTES 1 Per CMC Action Item CMC-A-2007-10-05, agency reviewers are reminded to review for compliance with the CCSDS Publications Manual as well as technical content. 2 Per CESG Resolution CESG-R-2008-10-006, the CESG no longer conducts pre-Agency-review reviews but is instead expected to participate in Agency reviews when they are announced. From kscott at mitre.org Tue Mar 18 09:13:47 2014 From: kscott at mitre.org (Scott, Keith L.) Date: Tue Mar 18 09:13:52 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Post-Red-2 Version of SIS BP-for-CCSDS Book Message-ID: <5EE81C5C4CFFF4418C5EAD12F49D64EE4C1E4686@IMCMBX01.MITRE.ORG> Greetings, A Post-Red-2 Version of the BP-for-CCSDS Book is on the CWE site. The link is to a folder containing the Red-2 review copy (original), the version with most of the Red-2 RIDs addressed (and track changes on), and the Red-2 RID database (excel file). There are still some minor changes to be made involving DTPC and ECOS, but this is closing in on the final dispositions to the Red-2 RIDS. We will be discussing this document at the upcoming meetings. The goal is to come out of the meetings with a completed document that addresses all of the Red-2 RIDS and a SIS resolution to move it forward. --keith Dr. Keith Scott Office: +1.703.983.6547 Chief Engineer, J86A Fax: +1.703.983.7142 Communications Netowork Engineering & Analysis Email: kscott@mitre.org The MITRE Corporation M/S H300 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA 22102 Area Director, CCSDS Space Internetworking Services MITRE self-signs its own certificates. Information about the MITRE PKI Certificate Chain is available from http://www.mitre.org/tech/mii/pki/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140318/0f489754/attachment.html From NickT at aiaa.org Tue Mar 18 15:13:34 2014 From: NickT at aiaa.org (Nick Tongson) Date: Tue Mar 18 15:50:35 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Reminder: Online Registration Lunch Option for the Spring 2014 Technical Meetings in Noordwijkerhout, Netherlands Message-ID: Skipped content of type multipart/related-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: No Lunch Vouchers List.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 32338 bytes Desc: No Lunch Vouchers List.docx Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140318/5a940264/NoLunchVouchersList-0001.bin From Nestor.Peccia at esa.int Wed Mar 19 08:34:38 2014 From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int (Nestor.Peccia@esa.int) Date: Wed Mar 19 08:34:53 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Reminder: Online Registration Lunch Option for the Spring 2014 Technical Meetings in Noordwijkerhout, Netherlands In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <19536_1395236082_53299CF2_19536_9983_1_OFA502B122.F32A3405-ONC1257CA0.0049A362-C1257CA0.004A9554@esa.int> Nick I would like to remind everybody that ESA partially subsidises the lunches for those who registered until 24th March 2014 If anybody wants to purchase lunch on-site (31st March - 4th April) , she / he shall pay the full amount (ca. 17 ?) ciao nestor This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140319/7e7a3a4b/attachment.html From tyamada at isas.jaxa.jp Thu Mar 20 20:55:37 2014 From: tyamada at isas.jaxa.jp (Takahiro Yamada) Date: Thu Mar 20 20:58:30 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: [Css-csa] Current draft of the Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <21D7680D-DD01-464B-83C2-276D6D925821@isas.jaxa.jp> Peter, > The current version of the SCCS-ARD has been loaded to the CWE at in the CSS-CSA Draft Documents folder: Thank you very much for updating the document. I could finally review it, and a copy of the document with my comments is attached here. All of my comments are minor and editorial, and I don't think we need a deep discussion to resolve them. You can just either accept or reject each of them. Please let me know if any of my comments is contentious. I can participate in any of the CSA WG sessions during the CCSDS meeting either by Skype of phone. Please let me know when I should join you. Best regards, Takahiro Yamada -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCCS-ARD_901-1-R-1_TYcomments.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 5268630 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140321/f7885ab6/SCCS-ARD_901-1-R-1_TYcomments-0001.bin From peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov Fri Mar 21 12:43:52 2014 From: peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov (Shames, Peter M (312G)) Date: Fri Mar 21 12:46:34 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: [Css-csa] Current draft of the Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) In-Reply-To: <21D7680D-DD01-464B-83C2-276D6D925821@isas.jaxa.jp> References: <21D7680D-DD01-464B-83C2-276D6D925821@isas.jaxa.jp> Message-ID: Takahiro, Thank you so much for taking the time to go through this document again. Your feedback has been very useful. I do have Skype on my system and we should have a speakerphone available, but I am not certain of this. I have heard from Nestor and others that phone accommodations may be a problem and that Internet access is also limited. I will check into this once I am in Noordwijkerhout and will let you know what might be possible. As for the meetings themselves, we have a bit of a scheduling problem. It appears that the CSA meeting that is on the meeting room schedule for Tuesday AM (see attached) did not appear in the registration list. As a result no one signed up for that session. We do have people signed up for the Thursday AM & PM sessions. But the compressed four (4) day work schedule also has the Boot Camp and the CSA WG scheduled on Thursday in the afternoon. I must be there to present the Boot Camp materials for the first hour. The CSA WG could meet in the AM and then from from 1430 to 1600 in the afternoon if people are wiling. Please let me know your availability. I did read through your comments and it appears that the primary point you are making is that there is a significant amount of repetition and probably more specificity than you think is appropriate. In the interest of reducing the size of the document I will agree to remove all of the repetition. The question of the added specificity is one that I think we will need to discuss, but I do agree that including the added specificity does increase the size of the document. An example of this added specificity is stating a user requirement for TC frames and then also stating a requirement to do encoding, produce CLTUs, and (optionally) perform the COP. The reason for taking this approach is that there are at least three different specs involved in this, TC (33), TC sync & channel coding (11), the COP (75) and the SCID (34). Unless someone is familiar with all of these and how they are to be stacked up it may not be obvious that they are all needed nor how they should be used. We could combine this sort of thing into one requirement with a specific list of sub-clauses for clarity, but I do not know that this helps with the size of the document. We could also drop all of the more specific references, but at some loss of clarity for those not familiar with these specs. We also have this issue of people generally wanting "singular" requirement and not compound ones. We hear this from the ECSS reviewer (and otehrs) all the time. So while I agree that there is an implied amount of redundancy by using this approach it also brings greater clarity for the reader. In your OSCP (10) you provide a good overview of how the space data link and lower protocols stack up, but that is a Green Book. This document may be the best (only) place to provide concrete and normative guidance of how all of these specs should be stacked and deployed. I am open to feedback from everyone. Are we better off reducing the size of the document, at the risk of not being clear what is really involved in many of these deployments, or are we better off taking this more complete approach at the risk of making the document larger? Best regards, Peter On 3/20/14 6:55 PM, "Takahiro Yamada" wrote: >Peter, > >> The current version of the SCCS-ARD has been loaded to the CWE at in >>the CSS-CSA Draft Documents folder: > >Thank you very much for updating the document. I could finally review it, >and a copy of the document with my comments is attached here. All of my >comments are minor and editorial, and I don't think we need a deep >discussion to resolve them. You can just either accept or reject each of >them. Please let me know if any of my comments is contentious. > >I can participate in any of the CSA WG sessions during the CCSDS meeting >either by Skype of phone. Please let me know when I should join you. > >Best regards, >Takahiro Yamada -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Room_Schedule_Spring_2014-1.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 133461 bytes Desc: Room_Schedule_Spring_2014-1.pdf Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140321/64506a58/Room_Schedule_Spring_2014-1-0001.pdf From thomas.gannett at tgannett.net Sat Mar 22 10:04:59 2014 From: thomas.gannett at tgannett.net (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Sat Mar 22 10:05:03 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Results of CESG Polls closing 21 March 2014 Message-ID: <532da699.cb6a8c0a.45a8.5f68@mx.google.com> CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2014-03-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 133.1-B-2 Cor. 2, Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 133.1-B-2, Issued October 2009 Results of CESG poll beginning 7 March 2014 and ending 21 March 2014: Abstain: 0 (0%) Approve Unconditionally: 4 (80%) (Shames, Peccia, Barkley, Scott) Approve with Conditions: 1 (20%) (Calzolari) Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%) CONDITIONS/COMMENTS: Gian Paolo Calzolari (Approve with Conditions): CONDITION ON SANA: Note that the SANA Registry referenced as [8] shall be corrected (not in 133.1-B but in SANA) to show the value of PVN together with the (binary) Version Number. This is very important as the (binary) Version Number 000 corresponds to the PVN value 1 (and not zero). [8] "Space Assigned Number Authority (SANA) Registry: Packet Version Number." Space Assigned Numbers Authority. Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. http://sanaregistry.org/r/packet_version_number/. Total Respondents: 5 No response was received from the following Area(s): SOIS SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2014-03-002 Approval to publish CCSDS 702.1-B-1 Cor. 1, Technical Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1, issued September 2012 Results of CESG poll beginning 7 March 2014 and ending 21 March 2014: Abstain: 0 (0%) Approve Unconditionally: 5 (100%) (Shames, Peccia, Barkley, Calzolari, Scott) Approve with Conditions: 0 (0%) Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%) Total Respondents: 5 No response was received from the following Area(s): SOIS SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved Unconditionally PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From Nestor.Peccia at esa.int Mon Mar 24 02:02:37 2014 From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int (Nestor.Peccia@esa.int) Date: Mon Mar 24 02:02:53 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: [Css-csa] Current draft of the Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) In-Reply-To: References: <21D7680D-DD01-464B-83C2-276D6D925821@isas.jaxa.jp> Message-ID: <12796_1395644560_532FD890_12796_4656_1_OF1E75CFE2.A1032104-ONC1257CA5.0025FBBE-C1257CA5.0026B13D@esa.int> Peter The speakerphone will be a problem. There are omly 3 speakerphones in the hotel and they are already allocated. ESA/ESTEC does not want to rent them outside due to the cost. Let's see what to do when we are there ciao nestor This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140324/ae4da7d8/attachment.html From peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov Mon Mar 24 10:28:16 2014 From: peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov (Shames, Peter M (312G)) Date: Mon Mar 24 10:28:46 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: [Css-csa] Current draft of the Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) In-Reply-To: <12796_1395644560_532FD890_12796_4656_1_OF1E75CFE2.A1032104-ONC1257CA5.0025FBBE-C1257CA5.0026B13D@esa.int> References: <21D7680D-DD01-464B-83C2-276D6D925821@isas.jaxa.jp> <12796_1395644560_532FD890_12796_4656_1_OF1E75CFE2.A1032104-ONC1257CA5.0025FBBE-C1257CA5.0026B13D@esa.int> Message-ID: Hi Nestor, I have my own external speaker phone that I can connect to my laptop. If there are decent WiFi connections a simple voice over IP session using Skype audio should handle the problem. Thanks, Peter From: Nestor Peccia > Date: Monday, March 24, 2014 12:02 AM To: Peter Shames > Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All >, "css-csa@mailman.ccsds.org" >, "css-csa-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org" >, Keith Scott >, Takahiro Yamada >, Wallace Tai > Subject: Re: [Css-csa] Current draft of the Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) Peter The speakerphone will be a problem. There are omly 3 speakerphones in the hotel and they are already allocated. ESA/ESTEC does not want to rent them outside due to the cost. Let's see what to do when we are there ciao nestor This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140324/2f2c03a6/attachment.html From Nestor.Peccia at esa.int Mon Mar 24 10:36:18 2014 From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int (Nestor.Peccia@esa.int) Date: Mon Mar 24 10:36:34 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: [Css-csa] Current draft of the Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) In-Reply-To: References: <21D7680D-DD01-464B-83C2-276D6D925821@isas.jaxa.jp> <12796_1395644560_532FD890_12796_4656_1_OF1E75CFE2.A1032104-ONC1257CA5.0025FBBE-C1257CA5.0026B13D@esa.int> Message-ID: <17438_1395675381_533050F5_17438_14713_1_OF54D78924.E3EA7433-ONC1257CA5.0055A721-C1257CA5.0055B8BE@esa.int> Peter Excellent. I hope the wifi bandwidth will be ok. I had good and bad experinces in the holtel in the last years. ciao nestor This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140324/5434e56a/attachment.htm From laurals at aiaa.org Tue Mar 25 15:39:51 2014 From: laurals at aiaa.org (Laura Stafford) Date: Tue Mar 25 15:40:36 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] February 2014 - CCSDS.org Usage, CCSDS Mailman SPAM, and CCSDS Publications Reports Message-ID: Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CCSDS Website Usage Report - February 2014.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 92350 bytes Desc: CCSDS Website Usage Report - February 2014.pdf Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140325/7f81a595/CCSDSWebsiteUsageReport-February2014-0001.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CCSDS Mailman Summary SPAM Report - February 2014.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 69685 bytes Desc: CCSDS Mailman Summary SPAM Report - February 2014.pdf Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140325/7f81a595/CCSDSMailmanSummarySPAMReport-February2014-0001.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CCSDS Publications Usage Report - February 2014.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 236798 bytes Desc: CCSDS Publications Usage Report - February 2014.pdf Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140325/7f81a595/CCSDSPublicationsUsageReport-February2014-0001.pdf From tyamada at isas.jaxa.jp Fri Mar 28 06:17:48 2014 From: tyamada at isas.jaxa.jp (Takahiro Yamada) Date: Fri Mar 28 06:18:15 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Re: [Css-csa] Current draft of the Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) In-Reply-To: References: <21D7680D-DD01-464B-83C2-276D6D925821@isas.jaxa.jp> Message-ID: Peter, I'm sorry for my late response. I have been busy with the role of Utilization Management for our next asteroid mission this week. I hope you have arrived in Amsterdam safely. > As for the meetings themselves, we have a bit of a scheduling problem. It > appears that the CSA meeting that is on the meeting room schedule for > Tuesday AM (see attached) did not appear in the registration list. As a > result no one signed up for that session. I'm available until 5 pm (which is 12 pm in Japan) on Tuesday, so I can join you if you need me on Tuesday. > We do have people signed up for > the Thursday AM & PM sessions. But the compressed four (4) day work > schedule also has the Boot Camp and the CSA WG scheduled on Thursday in > the afternoon. I must be there to present the Boot Camp materials for the > first hour. The CSA WG could meet in the AM and then from from 1430 to > 1600 in the afternoon if people are wiling. Please let me know your > availability. I thought you were going to the SEA plenary after the Boot Camp on Thursday, but I will be available any time on Thursday. Please let me know the time you want me to join. > An example of this added specificity is stating a user requirement for TC > frames and then also stating a requirement to do encoding, produce CLTUs, > and (optionally) perform the COP. The reason for taking this approach is > that there are at least three different specs involved in this, TC (33), > TC sync & channel coding (11), the COP (75) and the SCID (34). Unless > someone is familiar with all of these and how they are to be stacked up it > may not be obvious that they are all needed nor how they should be used. > We could combine this sort of thing into one requirement with a specific > list of sub-clauses for clarity, but I do not know that this helps with > the size of the document. We could also drop all of the more specific > references, but at some loss of clarity for those not familiar with these > specs. In this case, TC sync & channel coding and COP (whether you do retransmission or not) must also be used if TC SDLP is used. So why don't you just specify the necessary recommendations. For example: "ABA Earth Use Node shall implement either (1) TC SDLP [33], TC sync & channel coding [11] (except for the Physical Layer Operations Procedures), and COP [75], or (2) AOS SDLP [12] and TM sync & channel coding [24] ." This covers everything mentioned in 5.2.2.1.14 through 5.2.2.1.18, and does not lose any information. SCID should be addressed in a separate clause. I don't think we should mention functions defined in the recommendations. For example, you don't need to mention acquisition and idle sequences anywhere in this document because they are mandatory parts of the SLE F-CLTU production function (see 2.4.1 of [45]). Clauses 5.2.1.8 through 5.2.1.10 should also be rewritten by just citing the SLE F-CLTU production function as follows: "ABA ESLT shall implement the SLE F-CLTU production function [45]." This covers everything mentioned in 5.2.1.8 through 5.2.1.10, and does not lose any information. All of this requires rewriting of many clauses, but I believe this will increase both readability and accuracy of the document. If you have different opinions, let's discuss them next week. Best regards, Takahiro Yamada From thomas.gannett at tgannett.net Fri Mar 28 09:51:13 2014 From: thomas.gannett at tgannett.net (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Fri Mar 28 12:36:42 2014 Subject: [Cesg-all] Results of CESG Polls closing 27 March 2014 Message-ID: <5335b309.8f658c0a.8d47.66a4@mx.google.com> CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2014-03-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 230.2-G-1, Next Generation Uplink (Green Book, Issue 1) Results of CESG poll beginning 7 March 2014 and ending 27 March 2014: Abstain: 0 (0%) Approve Unconditionally: 4 (100%) (Shames, Peccia, Calzolari, Scott) Approve with Conditions: 0 (0%) Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%) CONDITIONS/COMMENTS: Peter Shames (Approve Unconditionally): In the attached file I have made note of some editorial issues that could be addressed. I leave it to the CCSDS editor & WG to elect to fix them. Gian Paolo Calzolari (Approve Unconditionally): REMARK: the starting sentence of 1.1 will be changed to: This CCSDS Informational Report is a result of the work of the SLS Area to identify requirements, profiles and guidelines for a future telecommand recommendation(s) incorporating uplink rates of at least 10 Mb/s. Moreover, this report addresses requests from the Interagency Operations Advisory Group (IOAG). Keith Scott (Approve Unconditionally): The ARQ discussion seems good. My only comment is to keep in mind that it *may*, in some situations, be better to implement reliability mechanisms at higher layers (e.g. LTP, as mentioned (hop-by-hop), or SCPS-TP (end-to-end), or even BP). The point is only to make sure that if the environment warrants it, that link-layer ARQ can be tuned and/or turned off. I think this is consistent with the document. Total Respondents: 4 No response was received from the following Area(s): CSS SOIS SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved Unconditionally PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2014-03-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 130.0-G-3, Overview of Space Communications Protocols (Green Book, Issue 3) Results of CESG poll beginning 7 March 2014 and ending 27 March 2014: Abstain: 0 (0%) Approve Unconditionally: 2 (50%) (Peccia, Calzolari) Approve with Conditions: 2 (50%) (Shames, Scott) Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%) CONDITIONS/COMMENTS: Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This is a very useful document and most of the updates do just what is needed to bring it in line with the current CCSDS literature. However, it perpetuates the fiction that SPP is a network protocol and that it has actual features that perform routing. The same must be said of Encap. The attached file has some mark-ups where issues are identified and textual changes are suggested. It also includes quotes from the ISO Basic Reference Model (BRM 7498) where network layer and routing are defined. The SPP and Encap have none of these properties. We already have situations where the lack of clarity stemming from these incorrect uses of terminology have caused confusion. We should take the time to rectify this when we have the opportunity to do so. Nestor Peccia (Approve Unconditionally): I concur with SEA and SIS ADs remarks Keith Scott (Approve with Conditions): Summary of attached PIDs: 1) While CFDP provides some services traditionally associated with the Transport Layer, those services are 'bound' to CFDP and part of the CFDP Application Layer Protocol. 2) CCSDS has two service interfaces to network services: Encapsulation Service and IP (three if you count a 'raw' space packet interface). 3) There's more to QoS than just reliability (at least: reliability, in-order delivery, duplicate suppression) -- none of which IP or Space Packets provide. 4) Minor editorial change on end system addresses for clarity. 5) CFDP Transport Layer Services again. Total Respondents: 4 No response was received from the following Area(s): CSS SOIS SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -------------- next part -------------- CESG POLL ITEM DISPOSITION (PID) INITIATION FORM AREA PID NUMBER: 01 SUBMITTING AREA: Space Internetworking Services (SIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------ REVIEWER'S NAME: Keith Scott E-MAIL ADDRESS: kscott@mitre.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ DOCUMENT NUMBER: CCSDS 130.0-G-2.1 Proposed Green Book, Issue 2.1 DOCUMENT NAME: OVERVIEW OF SPACE COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLS DATE ISSUED: March 2014 PAGE NUMBER: 2-7 PARAGRAPH NUMBER: 2.2.4 PID SHORT TITLE: CFDP Transport-Layer Service I ------------------------------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED CHANGE: (Use From: "..." To "..." format) From: 2.2.5 TRANSPORT LAYER Space communications protocols of the Transport Layer provide users with end-to-end transport services. CCSDS has developed the SCPS Transport Protocol (SCPS-TP) (reference [13]) for the Transport Layer. The CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) (reference [15]) also provides the functionality of the Transport Layer, but it provides some functions (i.e., functions for file management) of the Application Layer as well. PDUs of a Transport Layer protocol are usually transferred with a protocol of the Network Layer over a space link, but they can be transferred directly by a Space Data Link Protocol if certain conditions are met. Transport protocols used in the Internet (such as TCP, reference [24], and UDP, reference [25]) can also be used on top of IP datagrams over CCSDS space links, reference [45]. IPSec (reference [27]) may be used with a Transport protocol of the Internet suite to provide end-to-end data protection capability. 2.2.6 APPLICATION LAYER Space communications protocols of the Application Layer provide users with end-to-end application services such as file transfer and data compression. CCSDS has developed five protocols for the Application Layer: a) Asynchronous Messaging Service (AMS) (reference [46]); b) CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) (reference [15]); c) Lossless Data Compression (reference [16]); d) Image Data Compression (reference [17]); e) Lossless Multispectral & Hyperspectral Image Compression (reference [48]); AMS is an application layer service for mission data system communications. CFDP provides the functionality of the Application Layer (i.e., functions for file management), but it also provides functions of the Transport Layer. Each project (or Agency) may elect to use application-specific protocols not recommended by CCSDS to fulfill their mission requirements in the Application Layer over CCSDS space communications protocols. PDUs of an Application Layer protocol (excluding CFDP) are usually transferred with a protocol of the Transport Layer over a space link, but they can be transferred directly with a protocol of the Network Layer if certain conditions are met. Applications protocols used in the Internet (such as FTP, reference [26]) can also be used on top of SCPS-TP, TCP and UDP over space links. To: 2.2.5 TRANSPORT LAYER Space communications protocols of the Transport Layer provide users with end-to-end transport services. CCSDS has developed the SCPS Transport Protocol (SCPS-TP) (reference [13]) for the Transport Layer. PDUs of a Transport Layer protocol are usually transferred with a protocol of the Network Layer over a space link, but they can be transferred directly by a Space Data Link Protocol if certain conditions are met. Transport protocols used in the Internet (such as TCP, reference [24], and UDP, reference [25]) can also be used on top of IP datagrams over CCSDS space links, reference [45]. IPSec (reference [27]) may be used with a Transport protocol of the Internet suite to provide end-to-end data protection capability. 2.2.6 APPLICATION LAYER Space communications protocols of the Application Layer provide users with end-to-end application services such as file transfer and data compression. CCSDS has developed five protocols for the Application Layer: a) Asynchronous Messaging Service (AMS) (reference [46]); b) CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) (reference [15]); c) Lossless Data Compression (reference [16]); d) Image Data Compression (reference [17]); e) Lossless Multispectral & Hyperspectral Image Compression (reference [48]); AMS is an application layer service for mission data system communications. CFDP provides the functionality of the Application Layer (i.e., functions for file management. The CFDP Store-and-Forward Overlay procedures provide application-specific transfer of data across multiple link-layer hops. Each project (or Agency) may elect to use application-specific protocols not recommended by CCSDS to fulfill their mission requirements in the Application Layer over CCSDS space communications protocols. PDUs of an Application Layer protocol are usually transferred with a protocol of the Transport Layer over a space link, but they can be transferred directly with a protocol of the Network Layer if certain conditions are met. Applications protocols used in the Internet (such as FTP, reference [26]) can also be used on top of SCPS-TP, TCP and UDP over space links. ------------------------------------------------------------------ CATEGORY OF REQUESTED CHANGE: Technical Fact ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUPPORTING ANALYSIS: A transport layer protocol should provide transport services to a set of applications. In this sense, the multi-hop functionality that is part of CFDP store-and-forward overlay provides that functionality ONLY to CFDP and is in fact part of the CFDP application-layer protocol. ------------------------------------------------------------------ DISPOSITION: CESG POLL ITEM DISPOSITION (PID) INITIATION FORM AREA PID NUMBER: 02 SUBMITTING AREA: Space Internetworking Services (SIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------ REVIEWER'S NAME: Keith Scott E-MAIL ADDRESS: kscott@mitre.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ DOCUMENT NUMBER: CCSDS 130.0-G-2.1 Proposed Green Book, Issue 2.1 DOCUMENT NAME: OVERVIEW OF SPACE COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLS DATE ISSUED: March 2014 PAGE NUMBER: 2-7 PARAGRAPH NUMBER: 2.2.4 PID SHORT TITLE: Network Layer Services ------------------------------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED CHANGE: (Use From: "..." To "..." format) From: 3.3 NETWORK LAYER 3.3.1 GENERAL FEATURES OF NETWORK PROTOCOLS CCSDS has one service for interfacing at the Network Layer: the Encapsulation Service. Within this service, there are two different types of packets: Space Packets defined in the Space Packet Protocol (reference [4]) and Encapsulation Packets defined in the Encapsulation Service (reference [29]). It should be noted that IP over CCSDS (reference [45]) utilizes only the Encapsulation Packet. To: 3.3 NETWORK LAYER 3.3.1 GENERAL FEATURES OF NETWORK PROTOCOLS CCSDS has two services for interfacing at the Network Layer: the Encapsulation Service and IP. Within the Encapsulation service, there are two different types of packets: Space Packets defined in the Space Packet Protocol (reference [4]) and Encapsulation Packets defined in the Encapsulation Service (reference [29]). IP over CCSDS (reference [45]) provides an IP service that utilizes the Encapsulation Packet. Note: while the Space Packet protocol provides a service interface that could be used for access to the network layer, the service is subsumed by the Encapsulation service. ------------------------------------------------------------------ CATEGORY OF REQUESTED CHANGE: Technical Fact ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUPPORTING ANALYSIS: Section 2.2.4 states that there are three standards for interfacing at the Network layer (Space packets, Encapsulation Service, and IP over CCSDS). While the Encapsulation Service can be used to invoke Space Packet delivery, one could also implement the Space Packet service interface without the encapsulation service. Regardless of the above, IP-over-CCSDS also provides a service interface to the (IP) network layer protocol that is distinct from either of the above. ------------------------------------------------------------------ DISPOSITION: CESG POLL ITEM DISPOSITION (PID) INITIATION FORM AREA PID NUMBER: 03 SUBMITTING AREA: Space Internetworking Services (SIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------ REVIEWER'S NAME: Keith Scott E-MAIL ADDRESS: kscott@mitre.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ DOCUMENT NUMBER: CCSDS 130.0-G-2.1 Proposed Green Book, Issue 2.1 DOCUMENT NAME: OVERVIEW OF SPACE COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLS DATE ISSUED: March 2014 PAGE NUMBER: 3-10 PARAGRAPH NUMBER: 3.3.1 PID SHORT TITLE: Network Layer QoS ------------------------------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED CHANGE: (Use From: "..." To "..." format) From: SPP and IP do not provide a function for retransmitting lost or corrupted data, so retransmission should be done by a higher-layer protocol if complete delivery of data is required. To: SPP and IP do not provide any QoS mechanisms for reliable delivery, in-order delivery, or duplicate suppression. If these functions are required they should be implemented by a higher-layer (e.g. transport layer) protocol. ------------------------------------------------------------------ CATEGORY OF REQUESTED CHANGE: Technical Fact ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUPPORTING ANALYSIS: ------------------------------------------------------------------ DISPOSITION: CESG POLL ITEM DISPOSITION (PID) INITIATION FORM AREA PID NUMBER: 04 SUBMITTING AREA: Space Internetworking Services (SIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------ REVIEWER'S NAME: Keith Scott E-MAIL ADDRESS: kscott@mitre.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ DOCUMENT NUMBER: CCSDS 130.0-G-2.1 Proposed Green Book, Issue 2.1 DOCUMENT NAME: OVERVIEW OF SPACE COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLS DATE ISSUED: March 2014 PAGE NUMBER: 3-10 PARAGRAPH NUMBER: 3.3.1 PID SHORT TITLE: Network Layer Addresses ------------------------------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED CHANGE: (Use From: "..." To "..." format) From: An End System Address, used by IP, identifies a single end system or a group of end systems. When an End System Address is used, a pair of End System Addresses must be used to identify both source and destination end systems. To: An End System Address, used by IP, identify a single end system or a group of end systems. If it is necessary to identify both the source and destination when using End System Addresses, a pair of End System Addresses must be used. ------------------------------------------------------------------ CATEGORY OF REQUESTED CHANGE: Editorial ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUPPORTING ANALYSIS: I suppose we don?t have any network layer that supports it, but one could envision a network layer service that only used a destination (and not a source) address. ------------------------------------------------------------------ DISPOSITION: CESG POLL ITEM DISPOSITION (PID) INITIATION FORM AREA PID NUMBER: 05 SUBMITTING AREA: Space Internetworking Services (SIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------ REVIEWER'S NAME: Keith Scott E-MAIL ADDRESS: kscott@mitre.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ DOCUMENT NUMBER: CCSDS 130.0-G-2.1 Proposed Green Book, Issue 2.1 DOCUMENT NAME: OVERVIEW OF SPACE COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLS DATE ISSUED: March 2014 PAGE NUMBER: 3-10 PARAGRAPH NUMBER: 3.3.1 PID SHORT TITLE: CFDP Transport-Layer Service II ------------------------------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED CHANGE: (Use From: "..." To "..." format) From: CFDP is designed to meet the needs of space missions to transfer files to and from an onboard mass memory. It is a file transfer protocol, but it also provides the functionality of the Transport Layer for detecting and retransmitting corrupted or lost data. It can be used on top of any protocol of the Network Layer (e.g., Space Packet Protocol, Encapsulation Service, IP over CCSDS), or directly on top of the TC Space Data Link Protocol or Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol if a Virtual Channel, a MAP, or a Port is dedicated to CFDP. In some circumstances it can be used on top of UDP, TCP or SCPS-TP. A summary of concept and rationale of CFDP is contained in reference [35]. To: Delete this paragraph from 3.4 (Transport Layer) and use the modified version below to replace the following paragraph in 3.5 (Application Layer): The CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) provides the functionality of the Application Layer (i.e., functions for file management), but it also provides functions of the Transport Layer. Modified version of the paragraph from 3.4 CFDP is designed to meet the needs of space missions to transfer files. It is a file transfer protocol, but it also provides services typically found in the Transport Layer, i.e. complete, in-order, without duplicate data delivery. It can be used on top of any protocol of the Network Layer (e.g., Space Packet Protocol, Encapsulation Service, IP over CCSDS), or directly on top of the TC Space Data Link Protocol or Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol if a Virtual Channel, a MAP, or a Port is dedicated to CFDP. In some circumstances it can be used on top of UDP, TCP or SCPS-TP. A summary of concept and rationale of CFDP is contained in reference [35]. ------------------------------------------------------------------ CATEGORY OF REQUESTED CHANGE: Technical Fact ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUPPORTING ANALYSIS: CFDP?s Transport Layer capabilities (more than just retransmission of lost data) are restricted to the CFDP application and are in fact part of the CFDP application-layer protocol. ------------------------------------------------------------------ DISPOSITION: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 130x0g2 Comparison with issue 2- SEA.doc Type: application/msword Size: 480256 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140328/2aca9b43/130x0g2Comparisonwithissue2-SEA-0001.doc -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 230x2g0_CESG_Approval-SEA.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 735535 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20140328/2aca9b43/230x2g0_CESG_Approval-SEA-0001.pdf