<html 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:Courier;
panose-1:2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@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:"Times New Roman \(Body CS\)";
panose-1:2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
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;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Courier;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:Courier;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Courier;
color:windowtext;}
.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>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Courier"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Courier">All: I forgot to add the WG on copy to this response to Peter Shames.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Courier"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Courier">David<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Courier"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Courier"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">From: </span></b><span style="color:black">"Berry, David S (US 3920)" <david.s.berry@jpl.nasa.gov><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, October 23, 2019 at 12:33 AM<br>
<b>To: </b>"Shames, Peter M (US 312B)" <peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov><br>
<b>Cc: </b>CCSDS Secretariat <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [EXTERNAL] CESG-P-2019-10-004 CESG Approval Poll<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt">Peter:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt">Regarding Condition #1: Yes, it is possible that an RDM could be tampered with, but as you point out this is a more general consideration within the CCSDS. When the Navigation WG discussed the prospect
of adding a checksum, we came up with a couple of potential drawbacks to the approach. One thing that comes to mind is that if a checksum is computed on an XML version, and that message is converted to a KVN format, the checksum would likely no longer be valid.
The use of a checksum is more often used to detect errors in transfer rather than tampering; someone knowledgeable of the content could re-engineer the checksum. There are other issues as well... We are not knowledgeable as to whether or not the CCSDS Security
Working Group has any guidance on these matters. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt">Regarding Condition #2: I propose to address Condition #2 by changing "in the registry" to "in any of the above listed registries" (there are 7, including the XML schema, 2 pre-existing registries, and
4 new registries, all of which are "Approved"). </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt">Please advise as to the acceptability of these responses to the conditions.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt">Best Regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt">David</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:16.0pt">Navigation WG</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">On 10/21/19, 2:26 AM, "CCSDS Secretariat" <thomas.gannett@tgannett.net> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> David:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> The CESG poll to approve publication of CCSDS 508.1-B-1, Re-entry
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Data Message (Blue Book, Issue 1) concluded with conditions. Please
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> negotiate disposition of the conditions directly with the AD(s) who
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> voted to approve with conditions and CC the Secretariat on all
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> related correspondence.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Tom<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2019-10-004 Approval to publish
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >CCSDS 508.1-B-1, Re-entry Data Message (Blue Book, Issue 1)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >Results of CESG poll beginning 4 October 2019 and ending 18 October 2019:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > Abstain: 1 (20%) (Calzolari)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >Approve Unconditionally: 3 (60%) (Merri, Burleigh, Cola)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >Approve with Conditions: 1 (20%) (Shames)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): In Sec B.1.2, re
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > consequnce of not applying security, isn't it possible that an RDM
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > could be tampered with and there is no mechanism defined to detect
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > this? This is surely a more general concern in CCSDS in general,
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > but the addition of a simple checksum, or a digital signature,
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > would provide a significant boost in data confidence.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >In sec B2, the last paragraph, there is the statement:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > "The registration rule for new entries in the registry is the
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > approval of new requests by the CCSDS Area or Working Group
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > responsible for the maintenance of the RDM at the time of the request. "<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >I am left wondering "new entries in which registry"? AFAIK there is
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >no new registry specified in this document. Is this intended to
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >reference the registry of the XML spec? If so, that should be
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >clear. Likewise any process for updating the spec and marking a new version.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >Total Respondents: 5<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >No response was received from the following Area(s):<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > CSS<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> > SOIS<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >conditions have been addressed<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> >* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>