<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Dear CSTS colleagues,<br>
<br>
with respect to my note sent on February 7, I managed to close dome
of the open items listed in that note.<br>
<br>
Thanks to Holger the ASN.1 syntax check has been performed. The only
issues the compiler complained about were two missing OID
definitions. I have added these missing OIDs and with that the ASN.1
syntactically is correct now.<br>
<br>
I have performed various spot checks on the document and found and
corrected some clerical errors. I have uploaded the latest version
of the SFW to the CWE. You can find it at <span
id="ctl00_PlaceHolderTitleBreadcrumb_ContentMap"><span><a
class="ms-sitemapdirectional" href="http://cwe.ccsds.org/css">Cross
Support Services Area (CSS)</a></span><span> > </span><span><a
class="ms-sitemapdirectional"
href="http://cwe.ccsds.org/css/docs/Forms/AllItems.aspx?View=%7B8045374D-F8E0-4356-83CA-993252A38FE8%7D">Documents</a></span><span>
> </span><span><a class="ms-sitemapdirectional"
href="http://cwe.ccsds.org/css/docs/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fcss%2Fdocs%2FCSS%2DCSTS&View=%7B8045374D-F8E0-4356-83CA-993252A38FE8%7D">CSS-CSTS</a></span><span>
> </span><span><a class="ms-sitemapdirectional"
href="http://cwe.ccsds.org/css/docs/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fcss%2Fdocs%2FCSS%2DCSTS%2FCWE%20Private&View=%7B8045374D-F8E0-4356-83CA-993252A38FE8%7D">CWE
Private</a></span><span> > </span><span
class="ms-sitemapdirectional">CSTS Framework and Concept</span></span>.
The file name is 921x1r2 20150216.<br>
<br>
As discussed at the last telecon, I have generated two documents to
capture the rationale for most of the changes. The "official" RIDs
that resulted from the agency review and the proposed dispositions
are contained in the file "CSTS-SFW-Red-2 proposed RID resolution
20150216" which I have uploaded to the same CWE folder as the latest
version of the SFW. In those cases where the draft disposition text
is in red font, I think that we should discuss the matter in the
CSTS WG to reach a final conclusion. I should also draw your
attention to two RIDs ((RID #27 and RID #46) for which my initial
response was to accept them and to update the document as proposed.
However, after having worked further on the document I have changed
my mind and my inclination is now to reject those RIDs. The
modifications that were proposed after completion of the official
agency review as a Working Group internal activity are summarized in
the document "CSTS-SFW-Red-2- post agency review RIDs". In essence I
have captured the associated email correspondence and inserted into
the text the disposition I'm proposing. When the disposition is in
blue font, I regard the matter clarified and propose to close the
matter with the proposed disposition. In those cases where the
disposition text is in red font, at least the originator of the RID
or even the WG as a whole should review the matter before we can
conclude on how to updated the SFW. Unfortunately, there are cases
where the discussion threads are not cleanly separated, but I
believe that the material in the document is sufficient to
understand what the issue is.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Wolfgang
</body>
</html>