<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Dear all,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Please find attached the notes taken
during the CESG webex held on 21st October 2015.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">ciao</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">nestor</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">===========================================</font>
<br>
<br>
<ul>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>Document queue status</b></font></ul><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CCSDS
902.1-B-0, Simple Schedule Format Specification (Draft Blue Book)
CESG Ballot
? EB to deliver a url</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CCSDS 120.2-G-0, Lossless Multispectral
& Hyperspectral Image Compression (Draft Green Book)
Ready for CESG poll</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CCSDS 313.1-Y-0, CCSDS SANA Registry
Management Policy (Draft Yellow Book)
CESG
Ballot ? Doc to be updated</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CCSDS 350.1-G-1.1, Security Threats
against Space Missions (Draft Green Book)
CESG Ballot
? SEA to issue resolution </font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CCSDS 500.2-G-0, Navigation Data Messages
Overview (Draft Green Book)
Ready for CESG poll </font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CCSDS 727.0-B-4.1, CCSDS File Delivery
Protocol (CFDP) (Draft Blue Book) Interoperability Testing
Test still to be done and YB to be issued</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">EDS MB CMC poll to be issued including
the project change from BB to MB
Ready for CMC poll</font>
<br>
<br>
<ul>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>Polls with conditions not yet resolved
?</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">The polls with outstanding conditions
are:</font>
<ol>
<li value=1><font size=3 face="sans-serif">NAV PRM RB David Berry has just
issued responses to CESG conditions. Peter and Erik to give the go ahead</font>
<li value=2><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Creation of the SEA Architecture
WG. Conditions responded by Peter on 20th Oct 2015. </font>
<li value=3><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Nomination of MOIMS PS WG Chairs.
Poll failed</font></ol>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>Project Resource Table</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">12 Prototype 2 resources are missing
</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">1 DAI (2016) but DEDSL probably will
be OB</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">4 NAV (2017) </font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">4 SM&C (2016/2017)</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">1 TEL (2016)</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">1 SDLS (2017) Secretariat
was asked to update the resource table including ESA / CNES to implement
prototype 1 and 2</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">1 DTN (2018) Bundle Security Protocol</font>
<br>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>CWE Projects behind schedule</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">MOIMS NAV 1
Project</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">MOIMS SM&C
3 Projects</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CSS CSTS WG
1 Project</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">SOIS APP WG 1
Project</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">SOIS WIR WG 1
Project</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">SIS Voice WG 1
Project</font>
<br>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>On-line Strategic Plan, charters,
Projects : CMC Review</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CMC is reviewing it. A consolidate set
of comments is expected by 30th Oct 2015.</font>
<br>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>Interpretation of different polls
on MOIMS PS WG polls</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">After the saga on the creation of the
PS WG and considering the closed CESG / CMC polls and the conditions set
by CESG and CMC, the CESG interpretation (confirmed by various CMC members)
of the situation is as follows :</font>
<ol>
<li value=1><font size=3 face="sans-serif">the creation of the WG has been
approved. CESG conditions on the focus has been solved. </font>
<li value=2><font size=3 face="sans-serif">only the GB Project has been
approved </font>
<li value=3><font size=3 face="sans-serif">the BB Project will be left
as Draft Project, and once the GB is complete a CMC Project approval poll
will be issued. This is in line with conditions from CNES and ESA </font>
<li value=4><font size=3 face="sans-serif">we do not have today WG Chairs,
because the CESG poll has failed.</font></ol><font size=3 face="sans-serif">CESG
recommends </font>
<ol>
<li value=1><font size=3 face="sans-serif">to go ahead with the logistics
to create the WG and set the GB as an approved Project and the BB as Draft
project.</font>
<li value=2><font size=3 face="sans-serif">to ask the MOIMS AD to ask S.
Chien and M. Sarkarati to act as leaders of the forthcoming PS WG meeting
at Darmstadt..</font></ol>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>FSA proposal: Unmanned Spacecraft
Flight safety and Collision</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">The proposed system deals with an on-board
automated Collision Avoidance System (CAS) between controlled and cooperative
satellites. This is of very limited benefit since the vast majority of
close approaches and therefore collision risks are between a controlled
satellite and a debris. The most recent collision (Iridium-Cosmos) illustrates
this.</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Besides, the feasibility of this fully
automated on-board CAS is highly questionable since it would require:</font>
<ol>
<li value=1><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Proper anticipation of upcoming
close approaches which is mandatory and is based on proper screening of
ground-based orbital objects catalogs</font>
<li value=2><font size=3 face="sans-serif">In-orbit ranging with very high
relative velocity</font>
<li value=3><font size=3 face="sans-serif">In-orbit exchange of orbital
parameters, orbit models and planned maneuvers</font>
<li value=4><font size=3 face="sans-serif">On-board precision orbit propagation</font>
<li value=5><font size=3 face="sans-serif">On-board collision avoidance
manoeuver decision & determination (the automation of this function
is unrealistic)</font></ol><font size=3 face="sans-serif">In summary, the
proposed system and related standards are of limited usefulness and doubtful
feasibility. On the contrary, CCSDS Collision Data Message (CDM) is widely
used by satellite operators to perform collision avoidance from the ground.</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">As all the CESG ADs are not present,
it was agreed to add this point to the CESG agenda on 13thn Nov 2015</font>
<br>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>Allocation of Resources</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Normal process is as follows:</font>
<ol>
<li value=1><font size=3 face="sans-serif">WG Chairs / BOF Chair estimate
resources needed for new Projects or missing Prototypes (usually proto
2 resources are missing)</font>
<li value=2><font size=3 face="sans-serif">WG Chairs / BOF Chair requests
to WG / BOF members their Agency's interest to deploy resources.</font>
<li value=3><font size=3 face="sans-serif">WG / BOF member checks with
their CMC Agency representative the availability of resources.</font>
<li value=4><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Once confirmed (either by WG
member and / or CMC representative), WG Chair updates resource profile</font>
<ol>
<li value=1><font size=3 face="sans-serif">for a missing resource in an
existing Project </font>
<li value=2><font size=3 face="sans-serif">for a new Project
An automatic mail is generated informing AD / DAD and Agency
representative of affected resources.</font></ol>
<li value=5><font size=3 face="sans-serif">AD raises a resolution for a
CMC poll for project approval</font></ol>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>Proc & Org YB modifications for
selection of WG Chairs</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">We have agreed the following during
the last webex</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">1.We need a step by step procedure for
a new WG</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">a. BOF
may propose WG chair candidates. It is assumed that Agencies having interest
in the subject are actively participating to the BOF.</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">b. AD
asks for sake of fairness the CMC if they have additional candidates and
potential resources</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">c. AD
decides the nominees and proposes this in a CESG poll</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">2.To replace Chair or Deputy Chair in
an existing WG</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">1 b applies</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">but we did not agree about the following:</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Are rules needed in the YB for the selection
of WG Chairs ?</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">and do we need to extend the rules covering
the following questions ?</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Can CESG Chairs be WG or SIG Chairs?
</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Can a CMC representative be CESG Chair
or AD or WG or SIG Chair ? </font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Can an AD or DAD be WG Chair ?
</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Can a CCSDS member be Chair of
several WGs ? </font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Can WG chair and deputy chair of a WG
belong to the same Agency ? </font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Can an AD and DAD of a certain Area
belong to the same Agency ? </font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Can a CCSDS member be AD / DAD in several
Areas ?</font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">When resurrecting a WG, does also resurrect
the former Chair(s) ?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">As some ADs are not participating today,
It is proposed to discuss this at the CESG meeting on 13th Nov</font>
<br>
<ul>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>Architecture work</b></font>
<br><font size=3 face="sans-serif">Peter's inputs will be discussed on
a dedicated meeting planned for Tuesday 10th Nov at 5:30 pm</font>
<br>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"><b>AOB</b></font>
<ul>
<li><font size=3 face="sans-serif"> Lunch
tickets has to be paid cash on a day per day basis</font></ul></ul></ul><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>