<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=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 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:"Comic Sans MS";
panose-1:3 15 7 2 3 3 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
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;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:150222156;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-204933294 67698705 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:327296786;
mso-list-template-ids:1323713378;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:650906752;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1908216778 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l2:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l2:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l2:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l2:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l2:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:1235581033;
mso-list-template-ids:1280616210;}
@list l4
{mso-list-id:1294019628;
mso-list-template-ids:2100310058;}
@list l5
{mso-list-id:1460683452;
mso-list-template-ids:-1392329180;}
@list l5:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6
{mso-list-id:1541669251;
mso-list-template-ids:1919441398;}
@list l6:level1
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level3
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level4
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level6
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level7
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l6:level9
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Peter and Fred,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Peter, your summary is in the same ballpark as my thoughts. There are some minor differences, outlined below, which could be decided in Monday’s teleconference.<o:p></o:p></p><ul style='margin-top:0in' type=disc><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo10'>Items 2 through 7 all have “physical” in their names, and all are called “viewpoints” in your list. Their stakeholders for design are (in general) different individual subject matter experts, which is consistent with separate viewpoints. The user stakeholders (in general) have interests in more than one of items 2 through 7, which is consistent with a single physical viewpoint with multiple separate subject-matter views. The difference between these two organizations is small and could be resolved either way. Fred, do you have a preference from SC14?<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo10'>Your question whether it makes sense to identify physical services is where I found difficulty with the alternative factoring of physical views that I proposed. On many vehicles, the physical services are real, but the need to describe them in the terms of the Services viewpoint is awkward because the physical views already provide the parameters for energy flows without the special syntax of a software service interface. I’m happy with our current Services viewpoint.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo10'>Your correspondence between functional viewpoint and the operations and services viewpoints is a good idea, which allows for various mixtures of human and software implementations of control. Of course, the operations viewpoint will also describe the physical activities of a mission that is the object of the controls.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo10'>The distinction between data connectivity among the nodes of a mission and data connectivity within a single node could be handled by a shallow hierarchy of views within the Connectivity viewpoint.<o:p></o:p></li></ul><p class=MsoNormal>Ramon<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov> <br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, April 7, 2021 11:58 AM<br><b>To:</b> r.krosley@andropogon.org<br><b>Cc:</b> 'Frederick Slane' <frederick.slane@gmail.com>; 'SEA-SA' <sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Ramon,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks for your thoughtful approach to this conundrum. I think it is useful to try on different concepts for the different viewpoints, as a way to sort through the benefits (and deficits) of the different possible configurations.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Much of what you say about the relationships among functions, components, services, interfaces, composition, and the relationships among them ring true for me, but I am not yet sure that we are really on the same page. I think you may be agreeing with something like the following:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>functional</b> viewpoint with abstract functions and abstract exchanges of information over logical links.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>physical</b> viewpoint with concrete components and concrete connections.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>physical/connectivity</b> viewpoint that references the components (by correspondence) but focuses on data system connections and data flows.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>physical/structural</b> viewpoint that references the components (by correspondence) but focuses on mechanical connections and energy flows.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>physical/electrical</b> viewpoint that references the components (by correspondence) but focuses on electrical connections and energy flows.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>physical/thermal</b> viewpoint that references the components (by correspondence) but focuses on thermal connections and energy flows.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>physical/propulsion</b> viewpoint that references the components (by correspondence) but focuses on mechanical connections and propulsive energy flows.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>All of these items 2-7 include interfaces, but they are of different types, #3 is protocols stacks (separate viewpoint), #4 is structural (bolts, welds, etc), #5 is cables and connectors and electrical signals, etc. SEDS is relevant, I believe, for describing #3 and #5. RFM is relevant for describing #1.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>An <b>information</b> viewpoint that defines information structures, syntax and semantics, and is referenced by correspondence wherever this level of detail is needed. For example, the SEDS data structures would be described in this VP.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>services</b> viewpoint which is the documentation of the exposed formal interfaces of #3. I do not know that we would talk of “services” in the context of the other physical viewpoints, but maybe you have other ideas. Does it make sense to take about a “thermal service” or a “propulsion service”?<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>A <b>protocol</b> viewpoint with the usual protocol descriptions and stacks. Referenced by the service interface as an interface protocol binding signature and otherwise for the physical/connectivity viewpoint when those details are needed.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3'>An <b>operations</b> viewpoint with activities and actions and process flows that is, in essence, the concrete human implementation of functional flows.<o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Or maybe this is way off base from what you are thinking. Please let me know. And maybe we need a working WebEx session to discuss this stuff instead of trying to do it in email?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks, Peter<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Ramon Krosley <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, April 7, 2021 at 4:00 AM<br><b>To: </b>Peter Shames <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br><b>Cc: </b>Fred Slane <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>>, SEA-SA <<a href="mailto:sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org">sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>RE: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Peter and Fred,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>In the second half of my previous email (below) I suggested an alternative way to factor the physical views, which involved changes to functional and services views. I have since experimented with the idea and found it wanting. I’m happy with the physical/connectivity viewpoint as we have been developing it.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ramon<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a> <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, April 5, 2021 4:43 PM<br><b>To:</b> 'Shames, Peter M (US 312B)' <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> 'Frederick Slane' <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>>; 'SEA-SA' <<a href="mailto:sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org">sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> RE: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Here is how these issues have developed for SOIS:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>There are elements of composition, which are the instruments and software objects on board a spacecraft, described by SEDS. Also, there are deployment descriptions, which describe how the elements of composition are put together using subnetworks. The SEDS-described elements have provided and required interfaces, and a deployment description matches the required interfaces with specific provided interfaces to compose a whole vehicle. Recent work in SAVOIR and ancient work in SPA have extended the interface compositionality beyond subnetworks to include physical connections in the deployment description. This compositionality is not yet well expressed in SOIS, but it’s how I understand it.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Here is how that can extend to RASDS:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I think that these two kinds of description, {elements of composition, composition of those elements into an assembly}, cover the gap that you see in limiting ourselves to just interfaces. Fred’s comment that “we only want to standardize the interfaces” is addressed by the fact that we are actually standardizing the languages for these two kinds of description (SEDS in SOIS and RASDS in SAWG). Neither SEDS nor RASDS is standardizing any interfaces, but we have languages now for people to describe assemblies glued by interfaces. Calling the Physical/Connectivity viewpoint the “Physical Interfaces” viewpoint emphasizes what SEDS is doing. For RASDS, we could possibly call it the “Physical Deployment” viewpoint. However, I think that “Physical/Connectivity” says the same thing for RASDS.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>This discussion leads to another thought:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Here is how we are currently considering distributing the physical structure and energy transfer information into RASDS:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The Services viewpoint in RASDS describes provided data interfaces. The Functional viewpoint of RASDS indicates abstract deployment links between implicit required and provided data interfaces. The Connectivity viewpoint in RASDS describes concrete deployment links that are conduits for the abstract links in the Functional viewpoint. In the new Physical/Connectivity viewpoint being considered for RASDS, we are proposing to generalize the description of data interfaces and links to describe physical structure and energy transfer in addition to data. Our current direction places all the physical interfaces and links into one viewpoint and uses the Connectivity viewpoint as the mechanism to relate those physical considerations to the data considerations in the other RASDS views.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Here is an alternative way to distribute the physical structure and energy transfer information into RASDS:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>This relationship could be organized differently if we are willing to discard the data-centric nature of the Functional and Services viewpoints: In this alternative organization, the Services viewpoint would include physical interfaces for structure and energy transfer, and the Functional viewpoint would include physical functions and their abstract deployment links. The Connectivity viewpoint would include concrete links for physical structure and energy transfer. The Physical/Connectivity viewpoint would not be necessary.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I could work with either of these organizing principles.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ramon<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, April 5, 2021 1:53 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a><br><b>Cc:</b> Frederick Slane <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>>; SEA-SA <<a href="mailto:sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org">sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I think physical interfaces may be too limited for all of the physical structural aspect s that may be accommodated by this viewpoint. <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I don’t think that “interfaces” expresses structural connection and position particularly well. Nor power & propulsion for that matter. How do you propose to handle those kinds of views in a “physical interface” view?<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>That said, you could create other focused viewpoints for other aspects of these same “structural” elements. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>We need to think this out carefully, along with the existing RASDS Conndctivty viewpoint. It mat be that we shift to some sort of Physical Viewpoint, that is the “home viewpoint” for all of these, including Connectivity, and these other viewpoints reference that physical base through correspondence.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Cheers, Peter <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Sent from Peter's JPL iPhone X <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Everything should be made as simple as possible, <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>but not simpler. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>~Albert Einstein<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>On Apr 3, 2021, at 5:01 PM, <a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>Those are good points, Fred,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The “scales”, “levels”, or “tiers” that you mention are examples that provide alternative names for the boundaries between different scales of descriptions. We should use the word that resonates with folks.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The “Physical Interfaces” is a good descriptive name for the viewpoint to me.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ramon<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Frederick Slane <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, April 3, 2021 11:23 AM<br><b>To:</b> Ray Krosley <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>; SEA-SA <<a href="mailto:sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org">sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Ray,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Recursion is a nice elegant approach. I would hve called it "scalable" instead of "recursive", but that's perhaps a nit.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Recursion may also be another way of expressing the "Levels" as described in NASA HDBK 1005, where we list systems and subsystems and assemblies and so forth.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>In feedback from the US SC14 TAG, Alan Kirchbaum suggests "Physical Interfaces", which may be better than "Physical" for that Viewpoint. Thus, Recursion and Physical Interfaces will go a long way in consistently addressing system, subsystem, assembly etc. standards work. We do not really want to standardize anything but the interfaces.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:18.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:#336666'>Cheers,</span></i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:18.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:#336666'>Fred </span></i><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Frederick A. Slane<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Executive Director<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Space Infrastructure Foundation<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>731 North Tejon Street<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Colorado Springs, CO 80904<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><a href="mailto:freds@spacestandards.org" target="_blank">freds@spacestandards.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://urldefense.us/v3/__http:/www.spacestandards.org__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!dQGp2ush1q1eMLe2LHV-etOfFmzfQdFMbMbIdAyTsh-Ib1elSsQgYVFPuY002rvbe0E12Ce6$" target="_blank">www.spacestandards.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>+1-719-229-4252<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><i>"If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing</i>." ~W. Edwards Deming<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 8:29 AM <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org" target="_blank">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Hi Peter,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>One feature that I started to add, but then removed pending discussion, was a recursive structure of the view products. This structure might help to manage the correspondences that are possible. The main example of the recursive structure is two communications/connectivity views: One view that is used in CCSDS has the scope of the mission and has spacecraft, relay vehicles, habitats, and ground stations as its nodes. The view within that view, which is used in SOIS, has the scope of a single vehicle, and has the instruments of the vehicle as its nodes and subnetworks as connections. We have occasionally drawn diagrams that mix these views to describe how a communication link terminates in a vehicle and in a ground station (for example). The view-within-a-view establishes a context for other views whose scope is limited to the same vehicle. The other vehicle-scoped views include minimally the physical/structural view and an electrical power distribution view and may also include a thermal distribution view, a propulsion view, and others. Perhaps all these vehicle-scoped views could be considered products of the physical/structural viewpoint. The correspondences between objects in the vehicle-scoped views would indicate where each instrument of the vehicle participates in each view. These vehicle-scoped correspondences would not extend to the nodes of the mission-scoped communication/connectivity view, except that a whole vehicle may correspond to a node in the mission-scoped communication/connectivity view.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The vehicle-scoped views described above could express the energy flows that you identified in your second point. I think that we can describe the interaction between energy flows and information flows that occurs in the instruments of a vehicle. That interaction would be the subject of the vehicle-scoped communication/connectivity view if the recursive structure is agreeable.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Ramon<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b>From:</b> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov" target="_blank">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 1, 2021 6:09 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org" target="_blank">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>; 'Frederick Slane' <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com" target="_blank">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> SEA-SA <<a href="mailto:sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org" target="_blank">sea-sa@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Hi Ray,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I like what you have done with this. It makes sense and it fits into the overall format used for the other viewpoints.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>There are two items that occur to me that we may need to adjust:<o:p></o:p></p><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo6'>I think we need to be careful about how we talk about correspondences to other views. This is especially tricky in this instance, where we essentially have a communications / connectivity view of physical Nodes, with a focus on how they connect for communication, and also the allocation of what we might call computational functions to the Nodes, and your Physical / Structural view of the same Nodes, where the concern is their physical connections and the allocation of what we might think of as energetic vs computational functions.<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo6'>Related to that distinction, in this viewpoint, I think we would talk about those energetic flows instead of information flows (ref pg 4). So on pgs 5 & 6 I think we will want to avoid things like referencing IP addresses and control algorithms (except by correspondence) and instead would want to focus on the structural and energetic connections and even functions. Batteries, power panels, thrusters, etc all have energetic aspects which must be expressed in these views. But I think that any control / monitor interfaces should be handled in the communications / connectivity views. <o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Does this make sense to your way of thinking?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Thanks, Peter<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Ramon Krosley <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org" target="_blank">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 2:24 PM<br><b>To: </b>Peter Shames <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov" target="_blank">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>, Fred Slane <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com" target="_blank">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Cc: </b>"<a href="mailto:Christian.Stangl@dlr.de" target="_blank">Christian.Stangl@dlr.de</a>" <<a href="mailto:Christian.Stangl@dlr.de" target="_blank">Christian.Stangl@dlr.de</a>>, 'Yonghui Huang' <<a href="mailto:huangyonghui@hotmail.com" target="_blank">huangyonghui@hotmail.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>RE: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Hi Fred and Peter,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The attachment contains the charts from the core deck that relate to the Physical/Structural view. I added a few charts at the end that provide additional information for discussion in the April 12 teleconference. There is an improved example of a physical/structural diagram adapted from OPS-SAT, using the drawing style of RASDS. The additional charts identify information that the physical/structural model provides to its users. The users of the model constitute an additional set of stakeholders.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Ramon<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b>From:</b> Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov" target="_blank">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 29, 2021 12:08 PM<br><b>To:</b> Frederick Slane <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com" target="_blank">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> Ray Krosley <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org" target="_blank">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>>; <a href="mailto:Christian.Stangl@dlr.de" target="_blank">Christian.Stangl@dlr.de</a>; Yonghui Huang <<a href="mailto:huangyonghui@hotmail.com" target="_blank">huangyonghui@hotmail.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Hi Fred,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>On the surface this sounds fine to me. I’d suggest that you try to create a revised set of the core deck we have been using that:<o:p></o:p></p><ol start=1 type=a><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9'>Moves things around to meet SC14 needs<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9'>Adds your desired expansions of the common / shared viewpoints (Services, Operations, and expanded Enterprise)<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9'>Adds the SC14 specific Physical / Structural viewpoint<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9'>Moves anything you think detracts from the SC14 message to backup<o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I assume that you will show these revised materials to all of us before showing them to SC14. Is that correct? Can we review them at the 12 April SAWG meeting or will that be too late for you? If you want to schedule a working session sooner, just to focus on this in a timely way, I’ll be happy to set that up.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Thanks, Peter<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Fred Slane <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com" target="_blank">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Monday, March 29, 2021 at 10:54 AM<br><b>To: </b>Peter Shames <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov" target="_blank">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br><b>Cc: </b>Ramon Krosley <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org" target="_blank">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Christian.Stangl@dlr.de" target="_blank">Christian.Stangl@dlr.de</a>" <<a href="mailto:Christian.Stangl@dlr.de" target="_blank">Christian.Stangl@dlr.de</a>>, Yonghui Huang <<a href="mailto:huangyonghui@hotmail.com" target="_blank">huangyonghui@hotmail.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I'll have updated SC14 slides from the larger presentation on my priority list today. I will intentionally leave some SC14 details for the SC14 architecture group to fill in. <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I think an abridged version of slides to present, with full set as reading material will be good for the meeting.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The message I want to get across has three primary parts:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>1- RASDS core establishes the framework and methodology (i.e., Views) for our common baseline. References <u>ISO 42010: Systems and Software Engineering - Architecture Description</u><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>2- CCSDS extensions go into greater detail using the common baseline (CCSDS: ASL, SCCS ADD)<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>3- SC14 has its own story to tell and uses the common baseline for needed crosstalk.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> -- Engineering basis for Systems and Operations Views. Engineering "V" describes Space System Design Engineering and Verification. Reference <u>ISO 15288: Systems Engineering</u><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> -- Major SC14 extension Views are Physical, Operational, Services (expanded from previous RASDS), Enterprise (expanded back into CCSDS?)<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I have one slide that will be for SC14 technical management related to how the Working Groups correlate to Views.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I would like to move the exploration of DoDAF to a footnote. While useful in our development work, I think it detracts from the primary product for the standards committees.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Cheers,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Fred<br>Frederick A. Slane<br>mobile<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>On Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 7:55 AM Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov" target="_blank">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Hi Fred,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Then we had best get hopping at the next CCSDS working meeting, right? Or do you think what we have already is suitable as it is?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Thanks, Peter<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Fred Slane <<a href="mailto:frederick.slane@gmail.com" target="_blank">frederick.slane@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 2:10 PM<br><b>To: </b>Peter Shames <<a href="mailto:peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov" target="_blank">peter.m.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a>>, Ramon Krosley <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org" target="_blank">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Christian.Stangl@dlr.de" target="_blank">Christian.Stangl@dlr.de</a>" <<a href="mailto:Christian.Stangl@dlr.de" target="_blank">Christian.Stangl@dlr.de</a>>, Yonghui Huang <<a href="mailto:huangyonghui@hotmail.com" target="_blank">huangyonghui@hotmail.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>[EXTERNAL] SC14 meeting</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Hi Peter and All, <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>The SC14 meeting where I'll present our work is mid-April.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><i><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:#336666'>Fred </span></i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Frederick A. Slane<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Executive Director<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Space Infrastructure Foundation<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>731 North Tejon Street<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Colorado Springs, CO 80904<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><a href="mailto:freds@spacestandards.org" target="_blank">freds@spacestandards.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><a href="https://urldefense.us/v3/__http:/www.spacestandards.org__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!Z9QQVdae-rx4ji6veNe9h8S34Iun-nQ1ay7iS8bPwu6OtTPht_9R0HgYen4WiwjAniOwyUu9$" target="_blank">www.spacestandards.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>+1-719-229-4252<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><i>"If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know what you're doing</i>." ~W. Edwards Deming<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></body></html>