<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#44546A;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#44546A">I suspect that by the time you’re done, the PICS will somewhere want to say something like “includes all the fields in table 3-1 in the specified order” but Section
4 is good enough for me to let the document go to CMC poll to release for agency review.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#44546A"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#44546A"> --keith<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#44546A"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Kevin K Gifford [mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, May 06, 2015 1:16 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> peter.shames@jpl.nasa.gov; Erik.Barkley@jpl.nasa.gov; Scott, Keith L.<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Fink, Patrick W. (JSC-EV811); Barton, Richard J. (JSC-EV811); Thomas Gannett; Yuriy Sheynin<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Results of CESG Poll CESG-P-2015-03-006 Approval to release CCSDS 881.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-RFID Tag Encoding Specification (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Dear Peter, Erik, Keith – <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Thank you for your time and expertise in providing the review of the SOIS Wireless WG RFID Tag-Encoding Red Book. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Attached please find two documents detailing the WWG's responses and associated updates. The WWG concurred with all of the specific comments.
The attached spreadsheet lists the reviewer's (your) critique and lists the WWG action to address the RID along with indicating the specific document pages updated in the second attachment which is a clean version of the document with all identified Review
Items dispositioned.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Please let me know if the changes meet with your approval or if you have any remaining outstanding issues that need to be addressed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Thanks again for your time in reviewing the SOIS Wireless WG RFID Tag-Encoding Red Book. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Kevin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Thomas Gannett <<a href="mailto:tomg@aiaa.org">tomg@aiaa.org</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:31 AM<br>
<b>To: </b>Kevin Gifford <<a href="mailto:gifford@rintintin.colorado.edu">gifford@rintintin.colorado.edu</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"Fink, Patrick W. (JSC-EV811)" <<a href="mailto:patrick.w.fink@nasa.gov">patrick.w.fink@nasa.gov</a>>, "Barton, Richard J. (JSC-EV811)" <<a href="mailto:richard.j.barton@nasa.gov">richard.j.barton@nasa.gov</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Jean-Francois.Dufour@esa.int">Jean-Francois.Dufour@esa.int</a>"
<<a href="mailto:Jean-Francois.Dufour@esa.int">Jean-Francois.Dufour@esa.int</a>>, "<a href="mailto:peter.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>" <<a href="mailto:peter.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Erik.Barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">Erik.Barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>"
<<a href="mailto:Erik.Barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">Erik.Barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Results of CESG Poll CESG-P-2015-03-006 Approval to release CCSDS 881.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-RFID Tag Encoding Specification (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Dear Kevin et al.:<br>
<br>
The CESG poll to approve release of the SOIS RFID Tag Red Book concluded with conditions. The conditions are stated below--I have attached the SEA AD's mark-up (881x1r0_CESG_Approval-SEA.pdf).<br>
<br>
I have also attached the Word file (881x1r0_CESG_Approval.doc) used to create the PDF file used in the poll.
<u>Please use it to make changes in response to conditions.<br>
<br>
</u>Resolution of the conditions should be negotiated directly with the authors of the conditions (CCed) and reported back to the CESG.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Tom<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2015-03-006 Approval to release CCSDS 881.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-RFID Tag Encoding
Specification (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review<br>
Results of CESG poll beginning 29 March 2015 and ending 15 April 2015:<br>
<br>
Abstain: 3 (37.5%) (Merri, Behal, Calzolari)<br>
Approve Unconditionally: 3 (37.5%) (Suess, Barton, Scott)<br>
Approve with Conditions: 2 (25%) (Shames, Barkley)<br>
Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)<br>
<br>
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:<br>
<br>
Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This document still needs some work, particularly in the areas relating to the use of SANA and the guidance to the SANA operator.<br>
<br>
The data structure is also probably more awkward than it needs to be, but that appears to be a legacy limitation.<br>
<br>
please see the attached mark-up.<br>
<br>
Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions): Condition 1: For this type of recommendation an ICS should be stated to help ensure a good agency review -- it will be useful to know what is mandatory and what is optional in the ID (probably all of it but there is no
direct statement of that)<br>
<br>
Condition 2: it will be very helpful for agency reviews to know what the policy is for assigning database IDs in SANA -- note that claiming the SANA Registry as the administrator is insufficient as current CCSDS practice is that the recommendation that defines
a registry must, necessarily, identify its management policy.<br>
<br>
Keith Scott (Approve Unconditionally): I'm willing to let this go through to Agency Review, but the 'To Be Supplied' sections in the document (PICS, Patent Considerations) are questionable. I think the CESG should discuss whether such (admittedly slightly)
incomplete documents should be put out for Agency Review.<br>
<br>
<br>
Total Respondents: 8<br>
No response was received from the following Area(s):<br>
<br>
SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions<br>
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Thomas Gannett<br>
+1 443 472 0805 <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>