<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=utf-8">
<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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:87888407;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1709307310 67698705 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:370762537;
mso-list-template-ids:-1262046700;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">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">RASDSv2 is a fine term. It’s use consistently throughout the document retires the condition.
<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">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">-Erik<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>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><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"> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, May 22, 2024 12:30<br>
<b>To:</b> Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) <erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov>; Thomas Gannett <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de; miles.gannett@logothete.net; CESG <cesg@mailman.ccsds.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Erik & Tom,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I agree with using one term consistently.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">As for the adoption of RASDS++ vs RASDS v2, I checked with Fred Slane. His ISO TC20/SC14 organization is going to be a co-owner of the final document in ISO. We have agreed to call it: RASDSv2. This aligns
with other similar document version changes, IPv4 vs IPv6, SysML vs SysMLv2, etc. It also reflects that this is going to be published as CCSDS 311.0-B-2. It is an extension and evolution of that original document.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">So I request that Tom, during his editing, change
<b><i>all</i></b> instances of RASDS and RASDS++ to read RASDSv2. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Erik, please signal that this meets your condition.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I think there was also one question from Wilmot asking if all the new terms would be updated in the SANA Terms registry. My request is that the CTE perform that update after the final version of the document
has been approved.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">One last note about the review and publication process is also in order. I have agreed with Fred Slane, chair of ISO TC20/SC14, that we will follow this process:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">The document will go out for CCSDS Agency (and Observer, etc) review.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">In parallel we will send the Review notice to ISO TC20/SC14 with a request that they ask their Agency membership to participate in the CCSDS review process.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">In parallel I will be inviting outside systems architecture experts to also participate.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">All RIDs that are returned will be reviewed and dispositioned within the SEA SAWG, with the option to augment membership with SC14 participants.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">The final document, after the usual RID dispositioning, will be published as a CCSDS document.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">That document will then be sent to ISO for the usual “fast track” cover page process, and the final approved document will be jointly published with
an ISO number and attributed to both SC13 and SC14.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Anyone have any issues with this plan?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thanks, Peter<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="color:black">Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) <<a href="mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, May 21, 2024 at 4:34</span><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black">PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Thomas Gannett <<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b>Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>,
<a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a> <<a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a>>,
<a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">miles.gannett@logothete.net</a> <<a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">miles.gannett@logothete.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Tom,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I'm happy to see the RASDS++ vs RASDS concern addressed however you would like – just as long as a single term is used consistently, rather than leaving the reader wondering
if there is significance as to when RASDS++ is used vs RASDS. Frankly RASDS++ sounds like a marketing buzz word to me. I’d suggest just indicating RASDS 2.0, but if you choose to use RASDS++ consistently throughout the document that is okay too.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">-Erik
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><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"> Thomas Gannett <<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, May 21, 2024 12:44<br>
<b>To:</b> Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) <<a href="mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>;
<a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a>; <a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">
miles.gannett@logothete.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Erik:
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Since your acquiescence is limited to the UML inheritance condition/question, I believe Peter’s initial response grants editorial freedom to accept your RASDS++
vs. RASDS proposal. Please respond by return email if you are satisfied that that condition is closed as well. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Tom
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#1F497D">Logothete, L.L.C.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#1F497D"><a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:#1F497D">+1 443 472 0805</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"> Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) [<a href="mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 20, 2024 9:00 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Shames, Peter M (US 312B); Thomas Gannett; <a href="mailto:secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">
secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a>; <a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">
miles.gannett@logothete.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Yes, that works. UML inheritance condition/question resolved. Thank you.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Best regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">-Erik</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><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"> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 20, 2024 17:21<br>
<b>To:</b> Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) <<a href="mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>; Thomas Gannett <<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a>>;
<a href="mailto:secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a>; <a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">
miles.gannett@logothete.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Hi Erik,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="color:black">Yes. You could say that “correspondence” is a specialization of “Association (other relationship, labelled)”. That said, we did explicitly assign a relationship meaning, and a separate type of arrow, to
this relationship. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="color:black">If we address this in a footnote to Fig 3-3, stated thus:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">“Relationships inherited from UML, with Correspondence added as a named extension to Association”</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="color:black">Does that meet your concern?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="color:black">Thanks, Peter</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="background:white"><span style="color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="color:black">Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) <<a href="mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, May 20, 2024 at 4:07</span><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black">PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>, Thomas Gannett <<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a>>,
<a href="mailto:secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a> <<a href="mailto:secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b><a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a> <<a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a>>,
<a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">miles.gannett@logothete.net</a> <<a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">miles.gannett@logothete.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Peter,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">My suggestion is to note that the correspondence is derived from the UML "Association" relationship. Given that this is making use of UML class diagram definitions to start
with, that seems to be the best “home” for the RASDS derivation. Do you agree?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">-Erik</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><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"> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 20, 2024 11:35<br>
<b>To:</b> Thomas Gannett <<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a>>;
<a href="mailto:secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) <<a href="mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>;
<a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a>; <a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">
miles.gannett@logothete.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Hi Tom,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I am completely confident that the issues I pointed out will be satisfied during your final editorial pass over the document.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Having just reviewed the comments from the other ADs I am similarly confident that you can handle all of these as editorial as well. I hope the other ADs concur.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">The only even slightly crunchy comment, IMHO, was Erik’s. He is correct that most of Fig 3-3 was, in fact, inherited from UML. However, in Fig 3-3 we also added “Correspondence”, which is not a relationship
that UML has defined. It is a new relationship added to meet requirements from ISO 42010. Hence “derived from”.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Is that acceptable? Or would you rather put in a footnote stating something like “Inherited from UML, with Correspondence extension”</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thanks, Peter</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="color:black">Thomas Gannett <<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, May 20, 2024 at 9:06</span><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black">AM<br>
<b>To: </b><a href="mailto:secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a> <<a href="mailto:secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>>, Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b>Barkley, Erik J (US 3970) <<a href="mailto:erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">erik.j.barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>,
<a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a> <<a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a>>,
<a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">miles.gannett@logothete.net</a> <<a href="mailto:miles.gannett@logothete.net">miles.gannett@logothete.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[EXTERNAL] RE: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Peter:<br>
<br>
As discussed previously, in order to expedite processing, CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1), was placed in CESG polling while undergoing concurrent editing.<br>
<br>
If you are confident, as I am, that the draft resulting from the in-progress editing will correct the editorial issues identified in your conditional approval, perhaps along with other editorial issues, please reply by return email stating that your conditions
are effectively satisfied.<br>
<br>
Tom<br>
<br>
<br>
Logothete, L.L.C.<br>
<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a><br>
+1 443 472 0805<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: CCSDS Secretariat [<a href="mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net">mailto:thomas.gannett@tgannett.net</a>]
<br>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2024 12:50 PM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov">Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:Erik.Barkley@jpl.nasa.gov">Erik.Barkley@jpl.nasa.gov</a>; <a href="mailto:Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov">
Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>; <a href="mailto:Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de">Tomaso.deCola@dlr.de</a><br>
Subject: Re: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review<br>
<br>
Dear Document Rapporteur,<br>
<br>
The CESG poll to approve release of CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review concluded with conditions. Please negotiate disposition of the conditions directly with the AD(s) who voted to
approve with conditions and CC the Secretariat on all related correspondence.<br>
<br>
<br>
CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2024-04-002 Approval to release CCSDS 311.0-P-1.1, Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review<br>
<br>
Results of CESG poll beginning 28 April 2024 and ending 17 May 2024:<br>
<br>
Abstain: 0 (0%) <br>
Approve Unconditionally: 2 (40%) (Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)<br>
Approve with Conditions: 3 (60%) (Barkley, Shames, Cola)<br>
Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%) <br>
<br>
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:<br>
<br>
Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions): 1) There are about 90 uses of the term "RASDS++" in the document and about 140 uses of the term "RASDS" (without "++"). There does not seem to be any indication in the book if there is to be inferred singificance
when one term is used vs another. I suspect not, and so would suggest simply introducing this as RASDS V 2.0 and then just uniformly refer to this as RASDS rather than switching terms back and forth.
<br>
<br>
2) figure 3 -3 -- the arrow defintions appear to be inherited from UML rather than derived -- there is not explanation offered as to what the derived properties are. As such I recommend that this be stated as inherited, not derived.
<br>
<br>
Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): Tom, excellent job with lengthy & challenging input. There are a few typos, as follows:<br>
<br>
Sec 2, pg - all, fix page numbers, they should read 2-1, 2-2…. The first page is just numbered “8”.<br>
Sec 2.2, pg 8, remove highlight on text 5.5.4.<br>
Sec 4, pg 4-1, change title to just “Enterprise Viewpoint”<br>
Sec 5.4.2.2, pg 5-3, Fig 5-2, White background on arrows obscures underlying figure elements<br>
Sec 9.9, pg 9-15, Fig 9-9, White background on arrows obscures underlying figure elements<br>
<br>
Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions): </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Just two minor points:<br>
<br>
1) Figure 5-2 should be enhanced (similar comment from Peter)<br>
<br>
2) table 9-1 mentions DTN layer with 'BPv7' between brackets: I'd simply point to Bundle Protocol still with 'BPv7' in brackets. Then as to the description, it emphasises on the routing part. I'd generally point to the store-carry-forward paradigm.<br>
<br>
3) still in table 9-1, there is the pointer to the optical physical item, why not including also the C&S? The table mentioned in the previous rows the TM/TC C&S (RF part), so that I see the inclusion of the optical one worth for the sake of the completeness.
<br>
<br>
<br>
Total Respondents: 5<br>
<br>
No response was received from the following Area(s):<br>
<br>
MOIMS<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions<br>
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed<br>
<br>
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>