<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Peter,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> there
is nothing as an SLS</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> “marching army”:
I am a pacifist as all SLSers :o) </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I confess that I must ask all CESGers
to confirm which of the following two statements is true for a BOF:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">1) a BOF meets, finds that there is
good work to be done but, despite (at least) two agencies support that
work, there are no resources ==> The Area ask to CMC to appoint a WG
and give the resources.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">2) a BOF meets, finds that there is
good work to be done, (at least) two agencies support that work and provide
resources ==> The Area ask to CMC to appoint a WG and possibly
give additional resources.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Whatever of the two statements above
is true (despite we need to know which one is correct for operating correctly)
my very last intention is to undervalue the resources issue and therefore
my point is not mixing/hiding it in a bullet speaking about charter and
chairs. ===> include a dedicated bullet (this could be among AD
Responsibilities - where the word resource is never present - unless the
resource statements for CESG are considered sufficient).</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Moreover, because of this very high
dignity and to "</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">to remind the CMC
that one of their responsibilities is to support the work with resources</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">",
some text could be added to section "</font><font size=2>2.3.1.2 CMC
Responsibilities </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">" e.g. under
bullet d where it could be highlighted by some additional text to the CMC
responsibility for new WGs.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Note that something already exists in
item d of "</font><font size=2>2.3.1.3 CMC Functions </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">".</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Fine with me the other magenta changes.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Ciao</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Gippo</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">From:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Shames, Peter
M (312B)" <peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov></font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">To:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int"
<Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int>, "CCSDS
CESG --" <cesg@mailman.ccsds.org>, </font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Date:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">25/09/2015 20:31</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Subject:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: [CESG] Revised
updates to CCSDS Org & Proc doc, A02.1-Y-4c1</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Sent by:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</font>
<br>
<hr noshade>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">Hi Gippo,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">Thanks for the feedback.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">In the discussion yesterday we explicitly
added the text to have the AD ask the CMC for both WG chair candiates and
for resources. I think it is completely appropriate to add that text
into sec 2.3.2.4.3. Unlike SLS, which tends to have a “marching
army” from which you can, and do, just use existing resources to create
new BoFs, some other areas do not have these existing resources. These
other “resource poor” areas have to go hat in hand to the agencies to
seek resources. You could say that it is cruel to remind them of
this, but it is the case. Anything we can do to remind the CMC that
one of their responsibilities is to support the work with resources is
probably an opportunity to be taken.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">Other comments are placed in-line, below.
The resulting revisions to text follows here, with the latest changes
based on your inputs marked in </font><font size=2 color=#ff42f9 face="Calibri">magenta.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">Regards, Peter</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">==========================================================================</font><font size=3>
</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.1.2 CMC Responsibilities (pg 2-5)</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
g) providing the overall administration of the organization, including
</font><font size=3 color=#008000 face="Calibri">nominating and appointing
CCSDS leadership (CESG & AD), and </font><font size=3 face="Calibri">the
very important function of the Secretariat; </font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri"> 2.3.2.3 CESG Responsibilities (pg
2-11)</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
n) approving WG Chairs and Deputy Chairs;</font>
<p><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">NOTE – For fairness and to help
achieve agency balance the AD proposing the Chair is to ask the CMC and
the member agencies for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy prior to requesting
the CESG ballot for the WG.</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">NOTE – BOF and SIG chairs are not subject
to CESG approval. </font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.2.4.3 Area Director Responsibilities</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">c) making recommendations to the CESG
concerning approval for the chartering and formation of WGs </font><font size=3 color=#ff00ff face="Calibri">and
nominating WG chairs</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">; </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">requesting
nominations of qualified WG chair candidates and contributors from the
CMC prior to polling the CESG for WG approval; replacing WG chairs
who are no longer able to serve;</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.3.4 Working Group Chairs (pg 2-16)</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">Working Group chairs are nominated by an
Area Director and approved by the CESG. Candidates for selection as WG
chairs must be recognized as a leading technical expert in the field covered
by that WG. Candidates may come from any organization (including industry)
and do not have to be employees of space agencies. </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">For
fairness and to help achieve agency balance the AD is required to ask the
CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy prior to requesting the CESG
ballot for the WG. If a Working Group chair can no longer serve
the AD must follow the same process in identifying a replacement. </font><font size=3 color=#008000 face="Calibri">As
a general principle, to avoid conflicts of scheduling or interest, a single
person may only be the Chair or Deputy of one WG at a time.</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.4 BIRDS-OF-A-FEATHER GROUPS (pg
2-18, last paragraph)</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">…</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">At such time as a BOF feels that it has
enough agreement to propose formation of a WG, it must schedule a meeting
with an AD to present its case. </font><font size=3 color=#ff00ff face="Calibri">The
BoF should have prepared the following materials, using the on-line chartering
system (see Sec 5.5):</font>
<ul>
<li><font size=2 color=#ff00ff face="Calibri">a draft charter (see Sec
5.5.1)</font>
<li><font size=2 color=#ff00ff face="Calibri">a candidate chair (if identified
by the BOF), </font>
<li><font size=2 color=#ff00ff face="Calibri">at least one project definition
(see Sec 5.5.2), </font>
<li><font size=3 color=#ff00ff>a resource profile for each project identifying
expected efforts and contributing agencies, and</font>
<li><font size=3 color=#ff00ff>a CCSDS concept paper (see 6.1.3) outlining
its technical scope. </font></ul><font size=3 face="Calibri">The AD makes
the initial determination as to whether to advocate the work further, to
recommend more BOF work on the charter</font><font size=3 color=#ff00ff face="Calibri">,
concept paper, projects, </font><font size=3 face="Calibri">and resource
profile, or to reject the proposal. If the AD recommends acceptance of
the proposal, the AD must then </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">ask
the CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy and for adequate resources
to support the work. Once a proposed WG chair (and possibly deputy
Chair) have been identified the AD must</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">
forward the draft charter, project definition, and resource profile, accompanied
by a CCSDS concept paper (see 6.1.3) outlining its technical scope, </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri"><strike>is
forwarded</strike></font><font size=3 face="Calibri"> to the CESG for a
decision. If the AD rejects the proposal, the BOF can appeal to the CESG
chairman for a wider hearing, or it can simply dissolve. BOFs initiated
from inside the CCSDS organization have a lifetime of no more than one
year.</font>
<p><font size=3><b>Added …</b></font>
<p><font size=3><b>6.1.3.3.4 </b>If a BOF has to modify and resubmit </font><font size=3 color=#ff42f9>the</font><font size=3>
charter </font><font size=3 color=#ff42f9>and supporting materials</font><font size=3>
to meet any changes as a result of CESG review, the concept paper shall
be updated as necessary and resubmitted as well.</font>
<p><font size=3> </font>
<p><font size=2 face="Calibri"><b>From: </b><</font><a href="mailto:cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org"><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri">>
on behalf of Gian Paolo Calzolari <</font><a href=mailto:Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri">><b><br>
Date: </b>Friday, September 25, 2015 at 7:57 AM<b><br>
To: </b>CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <</font><a href=mailto:cesg@mailman.ccsds.org><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>cesg@mailman.ccsds.org</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri">><b><br>
Subject: </b>Re: [CESG] Revised updates to CCSDS Org & Proc doc, A02.1-Y-4c1</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">All,</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
here is a couple of comments.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
I would remove "</font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">and contributors</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">"
from the proposed change to </font><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.2.4.3
Area Director Responsibilities - item c) <br>
The request of contributions is made in the BOF (otherwise there would
be no recommendation to go for WG) and nthing prevent an Agency from adding
resources. </font>
<br>
<br><font size=3>Recommend leaving this in, as discussed.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Strange enough the list of "</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">Area
Director Responsibilities</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">" seems
to miss what is stated under </font><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.3.4</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
first line.<br>
I suggest completing "</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.2.4.3
Area Director Responsibilities - item c)</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">"
to state somehow that - after candidates are proposed - the AD nominates
the Chair(s) asking CESG approval.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br>
<br><font size=3>Added text “nominating WG chairs”</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
The proposed change to section 2.3.4 does not reflect that we agreed that
a BOF is expected to ask agency representatives for initial chair candidates
to be reported to the AD within the concept paper (or within the resource
profile?) together with draft charter, draft project(s), etc.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font>
<br>
<br><font size=3>The added text (</font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">ask
the CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy and for adequate resources
to support the work. Once a proposed WG chair (and possibly deputy
Chair) have been identified) </font><font size=3>does just what we discussed.
We did not discuss any changes that involved sending the concept
paper, the resource profile, charter, etc to the CMC prior to CESG poll.
I do think that the AD request to the CMC for resources probably
needs to include at least a brief project descriptions, but thought that
was so obvious as to not need stating.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=3>Do you think we need to be more formal about how we describe
the process for making this request to the CMC?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Moreover it looks as the AD can only "</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">recommend
more BOF work on the charter and resource profile</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">"
and not on other items of the list following a few lines below.<br>
A possible rewording could something like this (better wording welcome
:o):</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><br>
At such time as a BOF feels that it has enough agreement to propose formation
of a WG, it must schedule a meeting with an AD to present its case providing
a BOF Package including:<br>
- a draft charter including candidate chairs (if identified by the BOF),
<br>
- at least one project definition (see 5.5.1.1.1), <br>
- a resource profile for each project identifying expected efforts and
contributing agencies, and <br>
- a CCSDS concept paper (see 6.1.3) outlining its technical scope. <br>
The AD makes the initial determination as to whether to advocate the work
further, to recommend more BOF work on the BOF Package, or to reject the
proposal. If the AD recommends acceptance of the proposal, the AD must
then ask the CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy and for adequate
resources to support the work. Once a proposed WG chair (and possibly
deputy Chair) have been identified the AD must forward the BOF Package
to the CESG for a decision. If the AD rejects the proposal, the BOF can
appeal to the CESG chairman for a wider hearing, or it can simply dissolve.
BOFs initiated from inside the CCSDS organization have a lifetime of no
more than one year.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
I invented the term BOF Package to make clear what I mean, but better wording
is surely possible and welcome.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=3>Agreed. See proposed changes, above.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
BTW for this clause</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font><font size=4 face="Calibri"><br>
6.1.3.3.4 If a BOF has to modify and resubmit its charter to meet any changes
as a result of CESG review, the concept paper shall be updated as necessary
and resubmitted as well. </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
I think that "its charter" is wrong as it is the charter of the
proposed WG and not the BOF charter.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
I wish you all a nice week end.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Gippo</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> <br>
<br>
<br>
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
From: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Shames,
Peter M (312B)" <</font><a href=mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov><font size=1 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</u></font></a><font size=1 face="sans-serif">></font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
To: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"CCSDS
Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec" <</font><a href=mailto:cesg@mailman.ccsds.org><font size=1 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>cesg@mailman.ccsds.org</u></font></a><font size=1 face="sans-serif">>,
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Date: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">25/09/2015
01:45</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Subject: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">[CESG]
Revised updates to CCSDS Org & Proc doc, A02.1-Y-4c1</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Sent by: </font><a href="mailto:cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org"><font size=1 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font>
<hr noshade><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Dear CESG colleagues,</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
During today’s CESG telecon we discussed one set of proposed changes to
the CCSDS Organization and Procedures Yellow Book (CCSDS A02.1-Y-4) addressing
soliciting WG chair nominations from agencies. We did not address
at all the conflict of scheduling or interest issues that have also been
raised in recent discussions.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Please see the following proposed changes to the document. This set
covers only the specific topic we discussed today. Proposed changes
from the existing text are indicated in </font><font size=2 color=red face="Calibri"><b>red</b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">.
The proposed change to deal with other topics are in </font><font size=2 color=#008000 face="Calibri"><b>green</b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Best regards, Peter</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> <br>
<br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
==========================================================================</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.1.2 CMC Responsibilities (pg 2-5)</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
g) providing the overall administration of the organization, including
</font><font size=3 color=#008000 face="Calibri">nominating and appointing
CCSDS leadership (CESG & AD), and </font><font size=3 face="Calibri">the
very important function of the Secretariat; </font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri"> 2.3.2.3 CESG Responsibilities (pg
2-11)</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
n) approving WG Chairs and Deputy Chairs;</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font>
<p><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">NOTE – For fairness and to help
achieve agency balance the AD proposing the Chair is to ask the CMC and
the member agencies for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy prior to requesting
the CESG ballot for the WG.</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">NOTE – BOF and SIG chairs are not subject
to CESG approval. </font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.2.4.3 Area Director Responsibilities</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">c) making recommendations to the CESG
concerning approval for the chartering and formation of WGs; </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">requesting
nominations of qualified WG chair candidates and contributors from the
CMC prior to polling the CESG for WG approval; replacing WG chairs
who are no longer able to serve;</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.3.4 Working Group Chairs (pg 2-16)</font><font size=2 face="Calibri">
</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">Working Group chairs are nominated by an
Area Director and approved by the CESG. Candidates for selection as WG
chairs must be recognized as a leading technical expert in the field covered
by that WG. Candidates may come from any organization (including industry)
and do not have to be employees of space agencies. </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">For
fairness and to help achieve agency balance the AD is required to ask the
CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy prior to requesting the CESG
ballot for the WG. If a Working Group chair can no longer serve
the AD must follow the same process in identifying a replacement. </font><font size=3 color=#008000 face="Calibri">As
a general principle, to avoid conflicts of scheduling or interest, a single
person may only be the Chair or Deputy of one WG at a time.</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">2.3.4 BIRDS-OF-A-FEATHER GROUPS (pg
2-18, last paragraph)</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">…</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri">At such time as a BOF feels that it has
enough agreement to propose formation of a WG, it must schedule a meeting
with an AD to present its case. The AD makes the initial determination
as to whether to advocate the work further, to recommend more BOF work
on the charter and resource profile, or to reject the proposal. If the
AD recommends acceptance of the proposal, the AD must then </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri">ask
the CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy and for adequate resources
to support the work. Once a proposed WG chair (and possibly deputy
Chair) have been identified the AD must forward</font><font size=3 face="Calibri">
the draft charter, project definition, and resource profile, accompanied
by a CCSDS concept paper (see 6.1.3) outlining its technical scope, </font><font size=3 color=red face="Calibri"><strike>is
forwarded</strike></font><font size=3 face="Calibri"> to the CESG for a
decision. If the AD rejects the proposal, the BOF can appeal to the CESG
chairman for a wider hearing, or it can simply dissolve. BOFs initiated
from inside the CCSDS organization have a lifetime of no more than one
year.</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<p><font size=3 face="Calibri"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri">_______________________________________________<br>
CESG mailing list</font><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u><br>
</u></font><a href=mailto:CESG@mailman.ccsds.org><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>CESG@mailman.ccsds.org</u></font></a><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u><br>
</u></font><a href=http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg><font size=2 color=blue face="Calibri"><u>http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg</u></font></a>
<p><font size=2 face="Calibri">This message and any attachments are intended
for the use of the addressee or addressees only.<br>
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole
or in part) of its<br>
content is not permitted.<br>
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete
it from your system.<br>
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.<br>
<br>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.<br>
</font><tt><font size=2>_______________________________________________<br>
CESG mailing list<br>
CESG@mailman.ccsds.org<br>
</font></tt><a href=http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg><tt><font size=2>http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
</font></tt>
<p><PRE>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>