<html 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=utf-8">
<meta name="Title" content="">
<meta name="Keywords" content="">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Courier New";
panose-1:2 7 3 9 2 2 5 2 4 4;}
@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;}
@font-face
{font-family:sans-serif;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* 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:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:"Courier",serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.msoIns
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-style-name:"";
text-decoration:underline;
color:teal;}
.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>
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Hi Nestor,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Answers to Jean-Marc questions are in-line, below. I'll submit the updated pages once I have reviewed the other CMC inputs.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Thanks, Peter<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<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-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">CESG <cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia@esa.int><br>
<b>Date: </b>Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 10:14 AM<br>
<b>To: </b>CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg@mailman.ccsds.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[CESG] [CMC] CESG Report to CMC<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="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"sans-serif",serif">Please either prepare response or update your Area report</span>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">CNES questions / comments:</span>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Page 9 / 120 : Which rationale for restarting IPSec testings ?</span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<< The IPSec testing was incomplete. As a result the YB report of the testing was not adequate for approval. Thus the tests must actually be run to the appropriate conclusion. >><br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080"> Interaction with IOAG is not clear: IOAG expresses what they need in SC’s, not what CCSDS want they use. Security is in all IOAG infrastructures and
projects.</span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red"> Peter to clarify</span></b>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<< Both of the IOAG Service Catalogs, #1 and #2 are almost totally silent on security. They do not even mention the topc, except for "bundle security" in SC#2. Neither are authentication nor encryption addressed. The SecWG was merely pointing this out.
It is true that most of the CCSDS services do have an access controlled mode, but the IOAG SC are silent on the subject. >><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Page 13/120 : What are the issues with DAI and MPS WGs ? They have approved projects and may not be in “early planning” depending what was discussed.
</span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red">Peter to clarify</span></b>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<< The draft DAI materials contain a great number of ambiguities and there is a concern that the proposed scope of work greatly exceeds the available resources. This does not seem like a recipe for success. Furthermore, the proposed work is not really supported
by the DAI charter, except in that it has a very vaguely worded clause "DAI WG will address all areas of Archive data formats, functions, and operations". There is no stated goal in the Charter that covers this extensive propsed body of technical work. This
was discussed with the DAI directly and a presentation describing the analysis of the draft approach was prepared by SEA SAWG and presented to the DAI WG. This can be provided if desired (attached here).>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<< The MPS WG is proposing to develop a single specification that combines, in one document, both a set of fully interoperable data format standards, not unlike what the MOIMS Nav WG and CSS SM WG has produced, and also a set of service specifications. The
body of CCSDS standards (and Internet standards, among others) are formulated with a focus on one topic at a time. The rationale is that individual standards, focused on a single "layer", may more easily be adopted and re-used, where a combined standard does
not have those properties. Granted that an understanding of the abstract interactions, and even services, that a data format will be used for is useful for understanding, but a formal service interface, ala CSS SLE, is a much more significant undertaking.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
The SEA recommendation is that these be produced as two separate, but related, specifications in alignment with usual CCSDS practices. >><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Page 14/120 : On resolution 1 and SCID document, 320x0p6.1, ESA RIDs are mentioned ; CNES never got any response or disposition of their RIDs. To be clarified. </span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red">Peter
to clarify</span></b> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><< My apologies. While we did review the CNES RIDs they were left off this slide. This is a proposed resolution and it has not yet been fully processed. When it is the CNES and ESA RIDs will all be addressed.
>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="FR"><br>
</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Pages 17~20 : SCID document, 320x0p6.1 appears on 3 pages.
</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Similar for CCSDS Application & Support Architecture…
</span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red">Peter to clarify</span></b>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><< It appears on pg 17, under "Exec Summary". It appears on pg 18 under "Approved Project Status" for the SEA SA. It appears, in error, on pg 19. This will be fixed. >><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Page 33/120 : Is that a question to IOAG (via liaison) or within the WG ? The question of IOAG priority on these services should be raised as well, together with the question
of how the IOAG priority <br>
will be taken into account, if very high or if very low. </span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red"> Erik to clarify, but the full IOAG ./ ICPA report will be put together by CESG Chair. This was my fault for not
having taken out the chart and include it in the IOAG report. I will rearrange the charts in the next report update</span></b>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Page 60/120 : “formalize the WG membership” to be explained = what is expected from CMC is not clear.
</span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red">Mario to clarify</span></b>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#004080">Page 101/120 : Are these statements about IOAG interfaces also part of the liaison report ?</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:red">
<b>Gippo to clarify but the full IOAG ./ ICPA report will be put together by CESG Chair. This was my fault for not having taken out the chart and include it in the IOAG report. I will rearrange the charts in the next report update</b></span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">content is not permitted.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in"><o:p> </o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">Please consider the environment before printing this email.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in"><o:p> </o:p></pre>
</div>
</body>
</html>