<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:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",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.apple-tab-span
{mso-style-name:apple-tab-span;}
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;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle25
{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="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Kevin, yes, exactly – the entire text of the Bundle Protocol spec needed verification by interoperability testing, because none of it had previously been verified;
from the perspective of CCSDS it was all new, and all new normative specification text requires interoperability testing. And the same is true for the CFDP v1 specification: all of the new normative specification text requires interoperability testing. It’s
really the same level of testing requirement, just a different scope due to the difference in prior validation<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">And yes, absolutely, this interoperability testing doesn’t guarantee the mission usability of any of the implementations involved. That acceptance testing still
needs to happen.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Scott<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;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><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Kevin K Gifford [mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 13, 2015 4:33 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Burleigh, Scott C (312B); Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate); Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org; CCSDS All<br>
<b>Cc:</b> sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org; sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Hi Scott – <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">OK, for DTN as a brand new specification there was a different level of interoperability testing required as compared to CFDPv1 then?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">I'm OK with that with the condition that "mission" interoperability testing is expected to transpire downstream.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Thanks for taking the time to discuss.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Kevin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><Burleigh>, "Scott C (312B)" <<a href="mailto:scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov">scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, July 13, 2015 5:25 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Kevin Gifford <<a href="mailto:Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu">Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu</a>>, "Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate)" <<a href="mailto:kscott@mitre.org">kscott@mitre.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>"
<<a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>>, CCSDS All <<a href="mailto:cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org">cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"<a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>RE: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Hi, Kevin. Actually, we have not yet undertaken any of the interoperability testing for the CFDPv1 (Revisions) Pink/Blue Book. I sent out an email a few days
ago listing the tasks involved and asking for volunteers, and I am sure I will be hearing some responses shortly. Notionally, though, I expect the testing will be done using modified versions of the ION (NASA) and ESA implementations of CFDP.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Keith is the real authority for your second question, but my own answer would be yes, this testing was required in order to get the Bundle Protocol specification
published as a Blue Book. The specification was a brand-new CCSDS specification, never previously verified by CCSDS interoperability testing, so that verification was needed.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Scott</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><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><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> Kevin K Gifford [<a href="mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU">mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 13, 2015 4:17 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Burleigh, Scott C (312B); Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate); <a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">
Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>; CCSDS All<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</a>;
<a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Scott – </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Thank you for your reply.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">I understand your explanation below. </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">For my information, which agencies have been involved in the CFDP interoperability testing that has been done to to this point on CFDPv1?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">As a possibly related activity, when JAXA and NASA completed ECOS BP interoperability testing at Pasadena in March 2015 was this testing necessary for the Blue
Book publication process?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Kevin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><Burleigh>, "Scott C (312B)" <<a href="mailto:scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov">scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, July 13, 2015 3:55 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Kevin Gifford <<a href="mailto:Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu">Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu</a>>, "Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate)" <<a href="mailto:kscott@mitre.org">kscott@mitre.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>"
<<a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>>, CCSDS All <<a href="mailto:cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org">cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"<a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>RE: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Kevin, sorry, I wasn’t trying to sidestep your question: yes, certainly implementations have been modified.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">This has been done (at this point) solely for the purpose of testing the specification revisions, by demonstrating interoperability between two different implementations
of the same specification revision text.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The flight mission usability of the modified code is – in this context, at this point – not at issue, and not relevant.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Further testing to verify the correctness of individual implementations for the purpose of deployment to those implementations’ users’ missions is certainly indicated.
But that testing is not the responsibility of CCSDS.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">That is, it definitely is the responsibility of CCSDS to perform interoperability test. But “interoperability testing” in the CCSDS context means a very specific
thing. It means the sort of testing that I have been describing. Nothing more.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The question of who does the additional testing that may be needed before a user is willing to deploy code on a mission is a very reasonable and important question.
But the answer is not CCSDS. It is somebody else, e.g., the user’s and/or implementer’s space agency.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The interoperability testing that the CCSDS CFDP Revisions Working Group is required to perform is limited to the testing that is needed to verify the clarity
and completeness of the revisions to the specification. Nothing more.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Scott</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><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><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> Kevin K Gifford [<a href="mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU">mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 13, 2015 1:57 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Burleigh, Scott C (312B); Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate); <a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org">
Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</a>; CCSDS All<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</a>;
<a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Scott – </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Back to my question: In the round of updates being discussed in this thread – has any CFDP codebase (NASA or someone else) been modified?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Part of the CCSDS protocol standard publication process is a requirement to perform interoperability testing – if members of the cognizant WG who developed the
standard don't interoperability test then who does? I agree that interoperability test costing is not always a CCSDS-only funded effort – the stakeholders could potentially fund interoperability testing – but to my knowledge it is always the responsible CCSDS
WG that either directly conducts, or oversees the testing by an independent contractor, so that the WG can complete the CCSDS-mandated interoperability testing.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Your statement: The only thing the WG is responsible for testing, I believe, is the revisions to the specification, and the way in which we test those specification
revisions is to ensure that independent implementations of the revised specification text can interoperate.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">The above is interoperability testing, correct? Whose two independent implementations would be utilized to verify proper interoperability testing?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Thanks.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Kevin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><Burleigh>, "Scott C (312B)" <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, July 13, 2015 2:29 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Kevin Gifford <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
"Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate)" <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:kscott@mitre.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">kscott@mitre.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
"</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"
<</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
CCSDS All <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"
<</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
"</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"
<</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Subject: </b>RE: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Kevin, I certainly agree that revised implementations need to be regression-tested for correct operation to protect users. But I don’t agree that this implementation
regression testing is the responsibility of the CCSDS CFDP Revisions Working Group.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The only thing the WG is responsible for testing, I believe, is the revisions to the specification, and the way in which we test those specification revisions
is to ensure that independent implementations of the revised specification text can interoperate.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">My understanding is that we do not test software in CCSDS; we only test specifications, by exercising code that was developed from those specifications. Somebody
else needs to pay for the testing of the software itself.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Scott</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><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><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> Kevin K Gifford [</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 13, 2015 1:21 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Burleigh, Scott C (312B); Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate); </span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">;
CCSDS All<br>
<b>Cc:</b> </span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">;
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Scott – </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Your statement below is: "The purpose of this interoperability testing is not to validate the correct operation of protocol implementations. It is rather to validate
the clarity and completeness of the protocol specification – demonstrating that the document provided sufficient guidance to enable independent implementers to develop software that interoperates."</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">So, I asked what I was missing and perhaps this is the nugget. Let me ask this: In the round of updates being discussed in this thread – has any CFDP codebase
(NASA or someone else) been modified? If it's just a specification (documentation) exercise I would agree (FWIW) with your reasoning. If any code has been changed then I would contend that generally requires retesting to protect the stakeholders/users.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Kevin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><Burleigh>, "Scott C (312B)" <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, July 13, 2015 2:12 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Kevin Gifford <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Kevin.Gifford@colorado.edu</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
"Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate)" <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:kscott@mitre.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">kscott@mitre.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
"</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"
<</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
CCSDS All <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"
<</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
"</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"
<</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Subject: </b>RE: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Kevin, FWIW, I disagree. I don’t think you have stated here what the “clear need” for repeating the interoperability testing of all parts of CFDP might be.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The purpose of this interoperability testing is not to validate the correct operation of protocol implementations. It is rather to validate the clarity and completeness
of the protocol specification – demonstrating that the document provided sufficient guidance to enable independent implementers to develop software that interoperates.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The clarity and completeness of the original, unmodified portions of the specification was validated many years ago, in the extensive interoperability testing
that preceded publication of the CFDP Blue Book, and it remains valid because those portions of the specification have not been revised.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">What has not yet been validated is the revised text of the specification, and that is what requires interoperability testing now. I don’t think additional testing
beyond what is required to prove out the specification can be justified.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Scott</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><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><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> Kevin K Gifford [</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">mailto:kevin.gifford@Colorado.EDU</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 13, 2015 9:55 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Scott, Keith L (9730-Affiliate); </span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">;
CCSDS All<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Burleigh, Scott C (312B); </span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-cfdp@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">;
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Hi Keith – </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From a pedantic test engineering standpoint, I'd strongly suggest regression testing the entire CFDP protocol suite. </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Certainly, I am not in-the-loop for the detailed technical protocol updates, but unless the updates were very minor, I see no engineering reason for not testing/retesting/regression-testing
the entire updated (and perhaps substantially roto-tilled) codebase. If the decision is a funds-available business decision, and the updates are very minor, then perhaps with explicit justification the additional testing could be either reasonably (defendable
by some reviewed document) waived or possibly postponed.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">I understand this increases the testing burden and necessitates (most likely) the need for additional resources. But if CFDP is used on any current (or future)
spacecraft, and especially the ISS in the near-term, then I think not testing the entire updated protocol suite is an engineering mistake (not performing due diligence when there is a clear need).</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">I just don't see now not retesting the entire codebase can be justified unless the updates are very, very minor. Am I missing something?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Kevin</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><Scott>, "Keith L." <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:kscott@mitre.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">kscott@mitre.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, July 13, 2015 10:34 AM<br>
<b>To: </b>"</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"
<</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Secretariat@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">>,
CCSDS All <</span><span style="color:black"><a href="mailto:cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[Cesg-all] CFDPv1 status update</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">All,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">The CFDPv1 book completed
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="http://public.ccsds.org/sites/cwe/rids/Lists/CCSDS%207270P41/Overview.aspx"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">agency review</span></a></span><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">,
and the changes necessitated by the RIDs were minor enough to not warrant another agency review and have been resolved. The attached book with resolutions, and RID resolution spreadsheet, are for your information.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">The working group is going to interoperability test the NEW parts of the protocol only — and that work is under way. When the interoperability testing is complete
SIS will issue a resolution to submit the book for final CESG Poll and then CMC Poll; that resolution will be accompanied by the final version of the book (hopefully same as attached) and the interoperability test report for the new elements of the protocol.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">As just mentioned, to reduce the interoperability testing burden, we plan to interoperability test only the NEW portions of CFDP (capabilities added by the current
update). When we submit the final document and interoperability test report, SIS will essentially be requesting a waiver on testing the remaining parts of the protocol. If anyone knows now that they’ll have an issue with this approach, could you please let
me know?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">V/r,</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">—keith</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Scott Burleigh<br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, July 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>"Scott, Keith L."<br>
<b>Subject: </b>RE: We're ready to go with a resolution to publish the CFDPv1 Blue Book, right?</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I think we can assert that none of the technical changes introduced since the agency review affect protocol functionality profoundly enough to warrant the expense
of an additional agency review; all of the changes are minor details. That’s going to be a judgment call for CESG, I guess, but I think it’s a defensible assertion.</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Scott</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>