<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
Dear Nestor,</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
I have to admit to being a little puzzled by some of the points that you are trying to make, but I may be mis-understanding your intent. Comments / questions are provided in-line below.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<div>I have the sense that we may be getting into issues of territorial / organizational interest as opposed to seeking what is best for the health of CCSDS. I hope that we can keep that goal in mind as we seek answers to these questions.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: medium;"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
Thanks, Peter</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div style="color: black; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; text-align: left; border-width: 1pt medium medium; border-style: solid none none; padding: 3pt 0in 0in; border-top-color: rgb(181, 196, 223);">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span><<a href="mailto:cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org">cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</a>> on behalf of Nestor Peccia <<a href="mailto:Nestor.Peccia@esa.int">Nestor.Peccia@esa.int</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:45 AM<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <<a href="mailto:cesg@mailman.ccsds.org">cesg@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>[CESG] Proposed changes to the CCSDS Yellow Book<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="border-left-color: rgb(181, 196, 223); border-left-width: 5px; border-left-style: solid; padding: 0px 0px 0px 5px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 5px;">
<div><font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Dear all,</font>
<br>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Some items for consideration when discussing (during our next CESG webex) the update of the YB wrt WG Chairs nomination.</font><br>
<ol>
<li value="1"><font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">The WG Chair / Deputy Chairs have also a resource component.
</font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif" size="3" style="font-family: sans-serif; font-size: small;">Do we need to address this ?</font><font>
<font color="#007f00"><b>(The Proc Doc makes it quite clear what the WG chair duties are (2.3.3.4), likewiese the AD (2.3.2.4.3). Does it add anything to also state </b></font></font><font color="#007f00"><b><font>“</font><font>Doing this work takes resources?</font>”<font>)</font></b></font></li><li value="2"><font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">WG Chairs / Deputy Chairs usually emerged from the hard work done during the BOF existence.
</font><font size="2" face="sans-serif"><font face="Calibri,sans-serif" size="3">Do we need to specify that the BoF proposes Chairs when discussing the charter ? See Note below<b><font color="#007f00"> (</font></b></font><font color="#007f00">I<font face="Calibri,sans-serif" size="3"> <b>thought
that this was already covered in 2.3.4, perhaps it needs further clarification beyond what else we are discussing.)</b></font></font></font></li><li value="3"><font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">AD / DAD of the Area on which the WG resides, should have some "say" in the whole discussion
</font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif" size="3" style="font-size: small; font-family: sans-serif;">Do we need to address this point ?
<b><font color="#007f00">(The </font></b></font><b><font color="#007f00"><font style="font-size: small; font-family: sans-serif;">Proc</font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif" size="3" style="font-size: small; font-family: sans-serif;"> Doc already says that the
AD proposes the WG chair. </font><font size="3"><font face="sans-serif">“</font></font><font face="sans-serif">2.3.3.4 Working Group chairs are nominated by an Area Director and approved by the CESG.”)</font></font></b><br>
<font face="TimesNewRomanPSMT"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> </span></font></li><li value="4"><font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">During polls if AD says "approve" and DAD says "disapproved, the vote that counts is the AD one (as per Proc & Org YB). Just imagine
an AD and a DAD nominating different candidates for the WG posts. How will we proceed ?
</font><font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Is this important or not ? </font> <font color="#007f00"><b>(The Proc Doc says that the AD is </b></font><b><font color="#007f00">“A</font></b></font><font color="#007f00"><b> member of the CESG as the single representative
of the CCSDS technical Area;” It does not confer any such responsibility or role for the DAD. To suggest otherwise is a little like giving the President or Prime Minister and also their deputies the same role and responsibility. This is not usually considered
to be a good idea since it leads to confusion.)</b></font></li><li value="5"><font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Considering that the ADs / DADs do not represent all the Agencies and they are always defending their principle to be "Agency agnostic"
when voting, I can not imaging ADs/ DADs nominating candidates from other Agencies.</font><font><font size="2" style="font-family: sans-serif;"> Do we include in the YB that AD or DAD can only nominate a candidate from his Agency ? Is this compatible with
the AD independence from his/her Agency ? </font><b><font color="#007f00"> (</font></b></font><b><font color="#007f00"><font>This seems like a peculiar position to take. Why would you want to restrict an AD to only nominate from his/her agency? If we really
want </font>A<font>Ds to be agency agnostic (and we now say they should be) we should encourage them to seek qualified candidates from any agency (or other sponsored organizations), as stated in 2.3.2.4.1)</font></font></b><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">How can an UKSA candidate be nominated (when UKSA has currently no representativeness in the CESG)? Will NASA/ESA ADs nominate an UKSA or CNSA
or FSA staff or etc.?</font><font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif"> Is it allowed that an AD nominates a candidate from other Agency ? What happens if there are resource issues for the candidate in case he/she is not participating in CCSDS? <b><font color="#007f00">(I
think that this can be resolved by asking the CMC and the CESG for qualified candidates. Presumably only candidates who are available and supported will be proposed. This request goes to all CCSDS member agencies. Do you want to cast the nets wider than
that?)</font></b></font></font></li></ol>
<br>
<font size="2" color="red" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Note:</font><font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> Is the
below proposal a good one ?</font>
<ul style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<li><font size="2" face="sans-serif">BOF proposes the leading Agencies for Chair / Deputy Chair (consulted previously with the related Agency's representatives) and its potential candidates</font>
<ul>
<li><font size="2" face="sans-serif">In case of an existing WG chair / deputy chair replacement , the AD consults and agree the nomination with the WG members (and the related CMC representatives)</font></li></ul>
</li></ul>
</div>
</blockquote>
</span>
<div><b><font color="#007f00">Why not just ask the CMC and CESG at the outset if they have candidates for the WG chair position? That gets the widest possible CCSDS member agency view.</font></b></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="border-left-color: rgb(181, 196, 223); border-left-width: 5px; border-left-style: solid; padding: 0px 0px 0px 5px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 5px;">
<div>
<ul style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<li><font size="2" face="sans-serif">AD consults in addition the CMC members for potential extra candidates.
</font>
<ol>
<li value="1"><font size="2" face="sans-serif">If no additional candidate is nominated, the AD raises a resolution to initiate the CESG poll (including the candidates selected by the BOF or existing WG)</font></li><li value="2"><font size="2" face="sans-serif">If additional candidates are nominated, a negotiation is started between the related stakeholders (including the CMC representatives) until an agreement is reached, after which AD raises the resolution for the
CESG poll. </font></li></ol>
<br>
</li></ul>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><b>Last but not least, I have some comments on Peter's proposal (in blue) and my comments (in green)</b></font><br>
<ul style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<li><font size="2" color="blue" face="sans-serif">NOTE – To help achieve agency balance the AD proposing the Chair is strongly encouraged to ask the CMC and the member agencies for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy.</font><br>
<font size="2" color="#008000" face="sans-serif">See my note above</font> </li><li><font size="3" color="blue">To help achieve agency balance the AD is strongly encouraged to ask the CMC and CESG for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy
</font><font size="3" color="#008000">(See my note above).</font><font size="3" color="blue"> A WG may also have a Deputy Chair, but this is not required.</font><font size="3" color="#008000"> A WG should have always a Deputy Chair (unless it is demonstrated
why not) </font><font size="3" color="#800000"> </font><font size="3" color="blue"> As a general principle, to avoid conflicts of interest or scheduling, a single person may only be the Chair or Deputy of one WG at a time.
</font><font size="3" color="#008000">OK if we also add</font><font size="3" color="blue"> "</font><font size="3" color="#008000">As a general principle, to avoid conflicts of interest or scheduling an AD / DAD should not be Chair or Deputy of a WG."</font></li></ul>
</div>
</blockquote>
</span>
<div><b><font color="#007f00">There has never been a requirement for a Deputy WG chair. What is the rationale for
<u>always</u> requiring this?</font></b></div>
<div><b><font color="#007f00"><br>
</font></b></div>
<div><b><font color="#007f00">The primary issue that I thought was being addressed was that there would be direct scheduling conflicts if one person were to be both a WG chair or Deputy chair of two different large WG both of which met for 3-4 days during the
week. One person cannot readily be in two places at once. That is simple physics. </font></b></div>
<div><b><font color="#007f00"><br>
</font></b></div>
<div><b><font color="#007f00">However, Since the duties and meetings of an AD do not typically concide with the duties and meetings of a WG chair it is not clear to me why this is seen as a “scheduling” concern. Furthermore, since the work of a WG must align,
by definition, with the goals of an Area I am having a tough time seeing this as a source of “conflicts of interest” as far as the technical work is concerned. Please explain why you think either of these conflicts might be an issue.</font></b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As with the consensus topic I did a little research on the web. I found some useful materials at <a href="http://www.w3.org/Guide/chair-roles">http://www.w3.org/Guide/chair-roles</a>, at <a href="http://www.iso.org/sites/directives/directives.html#toc_marker-10">http://www.iso.org/sites/directives/directives.html#toc_marker-10</a>,
and at <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2418.txt">http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2418.txt</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Such as:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>What to look for when choosing a chair</b></div>
<div>
<p><em>The following bullets based on suggestions from Joseph Reagle</em></p>
<ul>
<li>Experience in chairing similar groups, committees, and/or conferences; </li><li>Previous participation or technical contributions in related communities; </li><li>Ability to satisfy the time commitment (from you and/or your organization/management);
</li><li>Familiarity and/or willingness to learn W3C process and document formatting rules;
</li><li>The ability to keep the Working Group "in Charter", both for technical and IPR issues;
</li><li>The ability (both actual and perceived by the Working Group -- including potential competitors) to forge consensus fairly and without bias from your affiliation/employer and, sometimes, even your own technical positions.</li></ul>
<div>Perhaps we need to look outside our own interests and practices in order to come up with a better formulation for this? We could even, if we wished, define a voting process for candidates such as defined here: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting</a>.
I believe that the important thing has always been that we have qualified candidates with the necessary technical and leadership skills and also the backing of their agencies to provide resources.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Ciao, Peter</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<blockquote id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="border-left-color: rgb(181, 196, 223); border-left-width: 5px; border-left-style: solid; padding: 0px 0px 0px 5px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 5px;">
<div><br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">ciao</font>
<br>
<font size="2" face="sans-serif" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">nestor</font>
<pre style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">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.
</pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
</span>
</body>
</html>