<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear CSTS WG Members,<br>
<br>
I concur with outcome of the discussion of this topic and as
agreed at the London meeting I will add in the SFW a new
configuration parameter of the Cyclic Report procedure that
specifies the minimum reporting cycle permitted. For consistency
with a change agreed by the WG for the latest variant of the SLE
Books and different from what Margherita in the email below, I
suggest NOT to introduce a configuration parameter that would
allow to limit the maximum reporting cycle. I saw some statements
that there won't be be an upper bound of the reporting cycle.
While this is true for values that have any bearing in practice,
it is not correct in terms of the ASN.1 type specification. Since
the reporting cycle parameter will be mapped to the IntPos type,
it inherits the maximum value that type supports.<br>
<br>
Please let me know if not introducing a configuration parameter
for the maximum reporting cycle is acceptable to you.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Wolfgang<br>
<br>
<br>
Am 03.12.2014 15:29, schrieb <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Margherita.di.Giulio@esa.int">Margherita.di.Giulio@esa.int</a>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:14869_1417616959_547F1E3F_14869_7124_1_OF2DD08F3C.AE604E49-ONC1257DA3.003E3DA5-C1257DA3.004F90A5@esa.int"
type="cite"><font face="Calibri" size="2">Dear John, </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">I am in favour of the most flexible
solution,
the one with the simple type specification “IntPos” in the
ASN.1. </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">So, this would be the "type"
of the new configuration parameter that Wolfgang agreed to add
to the Framework.
</font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">A Service using the Framework
may/can still
delimit the lower/upper values for such parameter, depending on
service-specific
constraints.</font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">Kind regards,<br>
Margherita</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">----------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Margherita di Giulio<br>
Ground Station Back-end Section (HSO-GIB)<br>
European Space Agency ESA/ESOC<br>
Robert-Bosch-Str. 5<br>
D-64293 Darmstadt - Germany<br>
Tel: +49-6151-902779<br>
e-mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Margherita.di.Giulio@esa.int">Margherita.di.Giulio@esa.int</a><br>
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>
</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">From:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">John Pietras
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:john.pietras@gst.com"><john.pietras@gst.com></a></font>
<br>
<font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">To:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">"CCSDS_CSTSWG
(<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org">css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org</a>)"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org"><css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org></a>,
</font>
<br>
<font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">Date:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">25/11/2014 20:05</font>
<br>
<font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">Subject:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1">[Css-csts] Range
of delivery cycle values</font>
<br>
<font color="#5f5f5f" face="sans-serif" size="1">Sent by:
</font><font face="sans-serif" size="1"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:css-csts-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org">css-csts-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</a></font>
<br>
<hr noshade="noshade">
<br>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">CSTSWG colleagues ---</font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">I am in the process of updating the
status
and disposition of the RIDs that were submitted against the
Monitored Data
CSTS Red-1 book. One of those RIDs, NASA-4, Min/max values for
delivery
cycle, asks what an implementation should do if the delivery
cycle requested
in the Cyclic Report START invocation cannot be supported by
that implementation.
The CSTS SFW specifies a range of 1 second to 600 seconds (10
minutes),
which is enforced by the ASN.1 (that is, if anything greater
than 600 is
submitted, it will cause a protocol abort). </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2"> </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">In our discussion of this RID at the
London
meeting, we decided to make the allowed delivery cycle range a
configuration
parameter, such that the if a START invocation contains a
delivery-cycle
value that is within the range supported by the ASN.1 type
specification
but outside the range permitted by the configuration parameter,
the invocation
will be rejected with the diagnostic “out of range’. Wolfgang
agreed
to add an appropriate configuration parameter to the Framework
Cyclic Report
procedure.</font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2"> </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">I also seem to recall us discussing
whether
it makes sense for the Cyclic Report procedure to put a hard
upper limit
(currently 600) on the number of seconds allowed between
reports. If a
user wants reports only every 15 minutes, why should any
implementation
be prohibited from providing less-frequent reports? My
recollection is
that we decided to remove the upper bound, but my notes from the
meeting
do not mention this part of the discussion. </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2"> </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">So my questions are:</font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">a) Did we indeed decide
to change the delivery cyclic “range” allowed by the Cyclic
Report procedure
to be anything from one second and up? That would mean that the
specification
of the type for deliveryCycle would change from “INTEGER
(1..600)” to
simply “IntPos” in the ASN.1.</font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">b) Would the associated
configuration cover only the lower bound on allowed delivery
cycle values
(e.g., at most every 2 seconds even though the Framework
supports once
every second), or would it also allow an upper bound to be set
(even though,
if (a) is correct, the procedure itself does not have an upper
bound)?
In effect, will there be one configuration parameter,
minimumAllowedDeliveryCycle,
or also a second configuration parameter
maximumAllowedDeliveryCycle (or
perhaps a complex configuration parameter that contains both the
minimum
and maximum allowed values)?</font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2"> </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">Thanks.</font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2"> </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">Best regards,</font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2">John </font>
<br>
<font face="Calibri" size="2"> </font><tt><font size="2">_______________________________________________<br>
Css-csts mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org">Css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org</a><br>
</font></tt><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/css-csts"><tt><font
size="2">http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/css-csts</font></tt></a><tt><font
size="2"><br>
</font></tt>
<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>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Css-csts mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org">Css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/css-csts">http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/css-csts</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>