<span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Hi,</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">I think having
one entry for each of the subsections in Section 5 may make sense:</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">a) it's a kind
of logical approach</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">b) there are actual
some sections where I could see that implementation could (but shall not)
deviate: e.g., not implementing fragmentation (5.8). I still think all
of this should be mandatory but by separating it out we would at least
get a clear statement of non-compliance.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">For Section 4,
we may structure:</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">4.1</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">4.2</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">4.3</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">4.4.1</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">4.4.2</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">4.4.3</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Regards,</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Felix</span>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">From:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">"sburleig.sb---
via SIS-DTN" <sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org></span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">To:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">"'Dr.
Keith L Scott'" <kscott@mitre.org>, <sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org></span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Date:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">13/07/2022
07:45</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Subject:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">Re:
[Sis-dtn] Level of granularity in PICS</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Sent
by: </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">"SIS-DTN"
<sis-dtn-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org></span>
<br>
<hr noshade>
<br>
<br>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">On
section 5: I think we need entries for every bit of normative language
in this section that is not “SHALL” or “MUST”. Otherwise, though,
I would say that a code base that doesn’t implement all this stuff simply
isn’t BPv7. Maybe less harshly we could have something like a section
in which “Deviations From The BPv7 Standard” are listed? That’s
not strictly PICS style, but maybe there’s some wiggle room.</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">Scott</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"><b>From:</b>
SIS-DTN <sis-dtn-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Dr.
Keith L Scott via SIS-DTN<b><br>
Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 12, 2022 3:24 PM<b><br>
To:</b> sis-dtn@mailman.ccsds.org<b><br>
Subject:</b> [Sis-dtn] Level of granularity in PICS</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">So
I’m trying to clean up and have gotten to the PICS section. Felix
had a question about the level of granularity we need. I’m leaning
towards something like:</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">An
entry per CLA (Optional to implement but if you DO implement that CLA,
do it this way).</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">One
entry per service (register, deregister, change, send, cancel, …). Must
implement this service.</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">Something
about bundle format (referencing 9171)</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">Then
there’s section 5 of RFC9171. We COULD try to get away with a blanket
statement saying that CCSDS implementation should implement all of the
procedures in section 5, OR we could have entries for essentially each
subsection of section 5 in RFC9171 (Bundle Transmission, Bundle Dispatching,
Bundle Forwarding, …). I suppose the “advantage” of the latter
would be if an implementation wanted to deviate, it would be more ‘contained’
in the PICS.</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">Something
about admin record processing (RFC9171 section 6)</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">========</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">Thoughts
on the above, especially what to do about section 5 in RFC9171?</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">
--keith</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri"> </span><tt><span style=" font-size:10pt">_______________________________________________<br>
SIS-DTN mailing list<br>
SIS-DTN@mailman.ccsds.org<br>
</span></tt><a href="https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sis-dtn"><tt><span style=" font-size:10pt">https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sis-dtn</span></tt></a><tt><span style=" font-size:10pt"><br>
</span></tt></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"></p><PRE>This message is intended only for the recipient(s) named above. It may contain proprietary information and/or
protected content. Any unauthorised disclosure, use, retention or dissemination is prohibited. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately. ESA applies appropriate organisational measures to protect
personal data, in case of data privacy queries, please contact the ESA Data Protection Officer (dpo@esa.int).
</PRE>