<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=us-ascii"><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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.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><!--[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="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Hi,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>OK. I’m fine with getting things done earlier if that is realistic. I’ve added in the detail because I hate having to constantly redo the schedule (and I hate optics of it even more) because the original was not realistic. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The reality is that the last couple years are unlikely to be completed quicker than listed because many components are pretty hard set in their times (CESG, CMC reviews each run for (at least) 2 weeks, the length of ISO reviews is set, the CCSDS review lengths can be tailored I think, but that is not on the critical path). The other items in the last couple years (CCSDS and ISO editor queues, how quickly CESG, CMC comments can be address, the turnaround by the editors with the updates from the comments) are probably listed at their minimum times already and will already probably result in delays of our projects. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I think it’s reasonable and even a good idea to have a CESG technical review of the documents before they go out for their first public review. Hopefully technical issues will be caught and the public’s review time will not be wasted on issues that should have been caught. It would be great if the CESG and CMC reviews between the first and second agency reviews and after the second agency were not chances for new technical reviews when they already had a chance to participate in the agency reviews. I think is reasonable to restrict those reviews to ensuring that the correct processes were used to address the RIDs and that the responses to the RIDs were appropriate. This is what happens in most other standards organizations such as ISO. Or it would be good if we adopted rules like IETF where no single CESG member could hold up a document. I think in IETF at least 2 need to agree that there is a problem.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Anyway, thanks for reviewing the scheduling.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Wishing you prosperity and peace,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>-JOhn<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> MOIMS-DAI [mailto:moims-dai-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Mike Kearney<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, December 9, 2016 10:06 AM<br><b>To:</b> 'MOIMS-Data Archive Ingestion' <moims-dai@mailman.ccsds.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Moims-dai] Digital Archive Architecture Design Document Project Plan<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The schedule looks fine to me, though I would hope that we can maybe do some simplification and finish earlier. But the total elapsed time looks right for starters. Lots of detail there, John, thanks for the rigorous work. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The intent of the book colors is: <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Blue – Normative and testable<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Magenta – Normative but not testable<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Green – Informative (not normative). <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The decision on book color should be based on what we intend to produce (not on who reviews it, etc.). So if we intend to produce normative “shall” statements, then it’s magenta. If we’re going to produce non-normative descriptive material, then it’s green. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I think we want this ADD to define things like: There will be an abstraction layer; There will be bindings between the abstraction layer and the archives that do certain things; There will be a standardized user interface that displays metadata, etc. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>If that’s right, then it’s a magenta book. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>We asked the question earlier about whether an ops concept goes in the ADD or not, and we finally dropped the ops concept as a separate book. An ops concept is more of a green book, since we won’t make “shall” statements about how the system is actually operated, only about how it’s intended to be operated. We may need to add back an informative green book with descriptive architecture discussions and the ops concept. Or maybe we can make the ops concept (or rather “use cases”) become part of a non-normative annex in a magenta ADD. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Anyhow… bottom line is that I think the ADD is probably magenta. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'> -=- Mike<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Mike Kearney<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Huntsville, Alabama, USA<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><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>From:</b> MOIMS-DAI [<a href="mailto:moims-dai-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org">mailto:moims-dai-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>John Garrett<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, December 9, 2016 2:28 AM<br><b>To:</b> 'MOIMS-Data Archive Ingestion' <<a href="mailto:moims-dai@mailman.ccsds.org">moims-dai@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Moims-dai] Digital Archive Architecture Design Document Project Plan<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Hi,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>One more question about the project. Should this be a Green Book (Informational – not a standard) or a Magenta Book (a Standard, but not a testable protocol)? <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Most of the other CCSDS Architecture documents are Green but some others are Magenta Books.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I thought we had discussed it just a bit and decided it should be Magenta so it got reviewed widely. However, the last version of our draft long-term plan still shows this as a Green Book.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Wishing you prosperity and peace,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>-JOhn<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><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>From:</b> MOIMS-DAI [<a href="mailto:moims-dai-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org">mailto:moims-dai-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>John Garrett<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, December 8, 2016 1:23 AM<br><b>To:</b> 'MOIMS-Data Archive Ingestion' <<a href="mailto:moims-dai@mailman.ccsds.org">moims-dai@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> [Moims-dai] Digital Archive Architecture Design Document Project Plan<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I have an Action Item to add a project plan for Digital Archive Architecture Design Document to CCSDS CWE Framework. I’ve attached a draft of what I intend to enter into the CCSDS System before our Tuesday telecon (or I can try to enter it after if people want to discuss it at the telecon.)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Please feel free to provide any updates you think are appropriate.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>From the overall DAI plan, our plan was to start this project early the coming year and finish in 2020. I came close but show the project ending in early 2021. I’ve created a spreadsheet with estimated times to complete all the activities throughout the project. I’ve included the one’s required to show completion dates for in the CCSDS system (the unshaded rows). I’ve also added background activities that do not need dates in the CCSDS form, but they are activities which we need to allot time for and get through. These are the lightly shaded rows and many of those activities are performed by CCSDS and are out of our control. I’ve assigned what I consider as optimistic times for completion of those tasks. Personally, based on past experience, I think we may end up behind schedule on those items. I’ve also currently included ISO reviews in this document. I planned with the presumption that we will want to have concurrent CCSDS and ISO reviews. Is that what others expect for this document? Those activities are shown with darker shading. Note that the ISO processing takes place in parallel to the CCSDS review so the time required for the CCSDS review overlaps with ISO processing and review. Alternatively we could start and end the CCSDS and ISO reviews at the same time, which we have sometimes done in the past.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Let me know what you think.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Wishing you prosperity and peace,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-JOhn <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>