<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Peter,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> my
cent.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">1) Priority is on 320.0-B/M ==> let's
focus there</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">2) Define </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> “Extended
GSCID” or E-GSCID </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">(or any better
name)</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">3) Remark with NOTES that </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> a-
GSCID is the term used before (kept for backward compatibility) and it
defines a value that does go into the field(s) of the Transfer Frames (while
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> E-GSCID</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
does not). </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> b-
other documents refer to that value as MCID</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> c-
(optionally) future use of the acronym GSCID is discouraged/deprecated.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">4) Replace VN with TFVN and add a NOTE
to explain this painless replacement due to the fact that TFVN is used
by SDLP's and SLE documents and that "Version Number" could be
ambiguous as there are actually TFVN and PVN.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">That's all. </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">For the rest let's see the version Tom
will produce at CESG Poll.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Gian Paolo</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">Cc:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Tom Gannett"
<thomas.gannett@tgannett.net></font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Date:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">14/07/2016 18:01</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Subject:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: [CESG] Why
renaming GSCID inf revised CCSDS SCID Code Assignment Control Procedures?</font>
<br>
<hr noshade>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">Hi Gippo,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">That’s fine, but what do you propose we
do with the existing inconsistency? We have used two different terms
to mean the exact same thing. In one case (actually 4 cases) we call
these two fields “MCID”, in the other case we call the exact same two
fields “SCID”. In your opinion should we drop the term GSCID and
use MCID everywhere, or should we bring all of the protocols into line
and adopt GSCID everywhere?</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">Or, probably the worst case, should we
document this mistake we have made so that it is clear that we have two
terms for the same thing?</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">I’m asking you, in particular, because
all of those protocol docs are in your area. I’m also guessing that
you will be resistant to changing any of them, in which case the choice
is likely to be “Keep MCID.” We can do that, but then we will need
to put something in the “GSCID doc”, which should really in that case
be called the “MCID doc”, that these are actually one and the same.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">And I think, as I said, that we can call
this field, concatenated with the frequency bin, the “Extended GSCID”
or E-GSCID (or E-MCID).</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">I’d like to get your opinion about this
specific issue so I can include it in the revised 320x0 that I submit for
review.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri">Thanks, Peter</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Calibri"> </font>
<br><font size=3 face="Calibri"><b>From: </b>CESG <cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org>
on behalf of Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int><b><br>
Date: </b>Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 2:01 AM<b><br>
To: </b>CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg@mailman.ccsds.org><b><br>
Cc: </b>Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net><b><br>
Subject: </b>Re: [CESG] Why renaming GSCID inf revised CCSDS SCID Code
Assignment Control Procedures?</font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">IMHO reusing terms giving them a different
meaning is wrong by nature and prone to introduce backward compatibility
issues.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> <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)" <peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov></font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
To: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int"
<Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int></font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Cc: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"CCSDS
CESG --" <cesg@mailman.ccsds.org>, "Tom Gannett" <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net></font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Date: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">13/07/2016
17:22</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Subject: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re:
[CESG] Why renaming GSCID inf revised CCSDS SCID Code Assignment Control
Procedures?</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<div align=center>
<hr noshade></div>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Dear Gippo,</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
In this case we seem to have a term, GSCID, defined in 320x0 that is used
only in that document and nowhere else. And we have the fields that
compose that term, the VN and SCID, defined in every other relevant document
as the MCID. The only exception to this, I have been informed, is
the new USLP which proposes to use the term GSCID instead of MCID.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
In order to get this cleared up efficiently I propose that we use the term
MCID in the 320x0 document, thus fixing that obvious error, and that we
also bring the USLP in-line, before it sees the light of day.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
At that point we can use the term GSCID as I proposed, without any risk
of confusing anyone, since no other document uses that term.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Or, if you wish, we can create a new term, Extended SCID (ESCID) and define
it to mean the concatenation of the Frequency Band with the MCID (or GSCID,
if you wish to persist that into the future). </font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Or perhaps you want to change all of the other protocol docs to use the
term GSCID instead of MCID so that they are all consistent?</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Which of these are acceptable, to you and the other CESG members?</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Regards, Peter</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><b><br>
From: </b>Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int><b><br>
Date: </b>Wednesday, July 13, 2016 at 5:30 AM<b><br>
To: </b>Peter Shames <peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov><b><br>
Cc: </b>CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg@mailman.ccsds.org>,
Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net><b><br>
Subject: </b>Re: [CESG] Why renaming GSCID inf revised CCSDS SCID Code
Assignment Control Procedures?</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Dear Peter,</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
I never said that the current situation is perfect.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
However i do find inappropriate having a term that means alfa till today
and it will mean beta as of tomorrow.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Regards</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Gian Paolo</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> <br>
<br>
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
From: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Shames,
Peter M (312B)" <peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov></font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
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><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Cc: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Tom
Gannett" <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net></font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Date: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">12/07/2016
18:58</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>
Subject: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re:
[CESG] Why renaming GSCID inf revised CCSDS SCID Code Assignment Control
Procedures?</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<div align=center>
<hr noshade></div>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><br>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
<br>
Dear Gippo,</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
I appreciate your attention to detail and looking at this early on, but
I have to differ re some conclusions. I note the following:</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
<br>
</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
- </font><font size=2 face="Calibri">The
term GSCID was defined </font><font size=3 face="Calibri">as “</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">GSCID
= VN <b>. </b>SCID”</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"> where the “</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><b>.</b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">”
means concatenation.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
- </font><font size=2 face="Calibri">The
terms SCID and GSCID are used more or less interchangeably in the CCSDS
320x0b document, but they mean different things. This is a flaw in
the current document that I have tried to remedy.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
- </font><font size=2 face="Calibri">The
term SCID is defined specifically in the various protocol documents, 320x0
just references it.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
- </font><font size=2 face="Calibri">The
term GSCID <b><i>does not</i></b> appear in any of our protocol documents,
TC, TM, or AOS. They tend to call the combination of the VN (actually
the TFVN) and the SCID an MCID, not a GSCID.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br>
- </font><font size=2 face="Calibri">If
you search the CCSDS files you will find that the only reference to GSCID
is in this 320x0 document, and not in any others.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
All of that said, I think that there is really no impediment in the way
of extending the definition of GSCID to include the frequency band, because
globally, in fact, the frequency band has from the beginning been a part
of the actual physical and logical link layer signal. We just did
not acknowledge this until now.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
But if you are worried about some confusion for others we could introduce
a new term for the FB </font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><b>. </b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">VN
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><b>. </b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">SCID
combination. I’m reluctant to call it a “Super” SCID, that sounds
like a kid’s toy. ;-} And in truth, I think that this is
more of a Global SCID than the current definition, and which the protocol
docs call an MCID. In effect we have given the same thing two different
names, surely that is not a good approach? Maybe we should align
this book with all of the existing protocol docs and call the VN </font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><b>.
</b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">SCID combo an MCID and the FB </font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><b>.
</b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">VN </font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><b>.
</b></font><font size=2 face="Calibri">SCID combo the GSCID?</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
I am open to other suggestions.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>
Regards, Peter</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> <br>
<br>
</font><font size=3 face="Calibri"><b><br>
From: </b>CESG <cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of Gian
Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int><b><br>
Date: </b>Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 6:18 AM<b><br>
To: </b>CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg@mailman.ccsds.org><b><br>
Cc: </b>Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net><b><br>
Subject: </b>[CESG] Why renaming GSCID inf revised CCSDS SCID Code Assignment
Control Procedures?</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Dear CESGers,</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
in order to gain time and not to delay eventual Poll
and start of Agency Review, I would like to anticipate that as SLS AD I
wonder about the need of renaming GSCID in revised CCSDS SCID Code Assignment
Control Procedures.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
In fact the revised book includes a new definition of GSCID (see snapshot)
that is conflicting with the definition in the Blue Book in force (see
second snapshot) as the new one also refers to Frequency Band.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
First of all I think that it is not appropriate modifying a term used for
so many years (and for sure spread in "billions" of documents
from many agencies) also considering that the the prefix "Global"
is widely used for e.g. the Global VCID and Global MAP ID (for sure in
SLE and SLS books) without considering the Frequency Band.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Therefore there would be a discrepancy of meaning about the term Global
between the GSCID and the GVCID</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Last, but not list the book title "CCSDS Global Spacecraft Identification
Field" points to a field i.e. a portion of data that is normally contained
in transfer frames. In other words while the actual GSCID matches completely
the contents of some bits of a Frame Header, the proposed future GSCID
will not.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
As a conclusion I would retain the current definition of GSCID while
adding a new definition for the concatenation of the frequency band
(FB), 2-bit Version Number (VN) and the SCID.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
This could be called Universal SCID, Super SCID, Supreme SCID, Frequenced
SCID or whatever you prefer. [Please consider some humour
in some proposed definitions.]</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Regards</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Gian Paolo</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
PS Of course I did not perform a complete review of the document.......</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
<br>
<br>
</font><img src=cid:_1_0F909A740F90769400303C01C1257FF4 style="border:0px solid;"><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><br>
</font><img src=cid:_1_0F909CBC0F90769400303C01C1257FF4 style="border:0px solid;"><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee
or addressees only.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole
or in part) of its</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
content is not permitted.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete
it from your system.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee
or addressees only.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole
or in part) of its</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
content is not permitted.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete
it from your system.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font><font size=2 face="Courier New"><br>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.</font><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">
</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">This message and any attachments are
intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination
or copying (either in whole or in part) of its</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">content is not permitted.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">If you received this message in error,
please notify the sender and delete it from your system.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">Emails can be altered and their integrity
cannot be guaranteed by the sender.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">Please consider the environment before
printing this email.</font>
<br>
<br><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>