<span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Dear All,</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">thank you for
accepting the proposed way forward and acknowledging that all the raised
comments on the draft REC 2.5.7B were properly accounted for.</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Please find attached
the latest version of white-4 REC 2.5.7B including in Annex A the explanatory
text on PN registers suggested by Chris and incorporated in a note as suggested
by Gian Paolo. I only moved it to the end of the Annex.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">I will accept
all revision marks in it, call it RED REC 2.5.7B, and send it to agency
review along with PINK REC 2.5.6B (same as the pre-PINK version) and PINK
REC 3.1.6B (as approved in Fall 2019.)</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">As said many times,
discussion on PN registers convention is continuing in parallel to the
agency review since the issue encompasses other books.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Best Regards,
Enrico</span>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#800080;font-family:sans-serif">-----
Forwarded by Enrico Vassallo/esoc/ESA on 29/06/20 09:34 -----</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">From:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">Enrico
Vassallo/esoc/ESA</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">To:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">sls-rfm@mailman.ccsds.org</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Cc:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">James.S.Border@jpl.nasa.gov,
"Volk, Christopher P (US 335D)" <christopher.p.volk@jpl.nasa.gov>,
Massimo Bertinelli/estec/ESA@ESA, Greg.J.Kazz@jpl.nasa.gov</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Date:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">22/06/20
11:04</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Subject:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">CCSDS
RFM-DDOR WG remote discussions - proposed conclusions for RFM WG endorsement</span>
<br>
<hr noshade>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Dear All,</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">the input papers
concerning draft recommendation 2.5.7B for the Spring 2020 meeting and
the relevant comments received in writing by May 5 resulted in an in-depth
discussion by correspondence between me and Dennis with Giovanni's help
for the RFM WG, and Jim and Christopher for the DDOR WG.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">The results are
the response document that responds in details to all issues raised and
the W-4 (GB-EV-JB) version of REC 2.5.7B. Additionally, two consequential
changes have been agreed by the correspondence group for REC 2.5.6B which
got the pre-PINK name.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">I believe that
all raised questions have been responded to (except the PN register convention
that we agreed to work off line in parallel to the agency review of REC
2.5.7B). However, I would like everyone to check the attached 3 documents
and confirm that his/her issues have been solved satisfactory.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">In light of the
urgency with this (see extract from our AD email below), I would kindly
ask you to provide me with any disagreements or suggestions for improvement
you may have by next <b><u>Friday, June 26</u></b> (close of business
anywhere you live on Earth.)</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">If I do not receive
any such inputs by June 26, I will submit the 2 recommendations below to
the AD for requesting agency review along with what PINK REC 3.1.6B agreed
already in Fall 2019. REC 2.5.7B will have all revision marks removed and
REC 2.5.6B will be called simply PINK.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Best Regards,
Enrico</span>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">[attachment
"Response PN DOR Input Papers and Comments Rev 2-June.docx" deleted
by Enrico Vassallo/esoc/ESA] </span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">[attachment
"2.5.7.B-W-4 (GB-EV-JB).docx" deleted by Enrico Vassallo/esoc/ESA]
</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">[attachment
"pre-PINK REC 2.5.6B.docx" deleted by Enrico Vassallo/esoc/ESA]
</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">______________________</span></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"></p>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Dear All,</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
I think that some WGs reported planned resolutions
to trigger Agency Review.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
In this respect please keep in mind that Fall 2020 Meetings is planned
to start on 26 October.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Therefore consider that the following (minimum) timing requirement</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
a) One month for CESG + CMC Polls (longer if there are conditions)</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
b) Two months for Agency Review.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> <br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
This means that - in case you want the agency review closing e.g. mid October
- the CESG Poll shall start mid July latest.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
And if you want to consider that the CCSDS Technical Editor will need some
time to check and adapt your docs for the poll then better... hurry up!</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
<br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Regards</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> <br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Gian Paolo</span>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"></p>
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-Bottom:0px"></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>