<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=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Préformaté HTML Car";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
tt
{mso-style-priority:99;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.PrformatHTMLCar
{mso-style-name:"Préformaté HTML Car";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Préformaté HTML";
font-family:Consolas;
mso-fareast-language:FR;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
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="FR" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Dear Daniel, Ignacio and SDLS WG members,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I concur with Ignacio and Daniel proposals for Peter’s comments disposition. More specifically, taking Peter’s comments one by one (I attach Peter’s
commented version for reference):<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 1-1 : OK for the 2 comments<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 1-3, 3-1 : The usage of the term Payload: this term is duly defined upfront in SDLS book and therefore this definition replaces the CCSDS generic
definition in the context of SDLS. The term is used consistently throughout the document. Besides the term payload is widely used with that meaning in the COMSEC domain. I agree with Ignacio and Daniel that we should discuss this with Peter and advocate for
keeping this term. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 2-1 : Comment not understood. To be discussed with Peter. In any case we can remove the parenthesis in the note if that causes problem.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 2-2 : I do not support inserting in SDLS a duplicate of figures 6-1 of TM, TC and AOS books, but we could simply refer/point to it respectively
in sections 2.2.3, 2.2.4 and 2.2.5 with a statement like: “the structure of the TM/TC/AOS Transfer Frame with SDLS is given in Figure 6-1 of [1]/[2]/[3]. This statement could also be placed once in section 2.3.1.4 Security Header and Trailer.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 2-5 : Figure 2-4 : we need to change A and B to
<u>AOS</u> ApplySecurity payload or return (instead of <u>TM</u> ApplySecurity …)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P2-8, 4-9, 4-12 : NOTE on sequence number rollover : I would suggest keeping the NOTE but limiting it to the first sentence (The interpretation
of a sequence number rollover (to zero) is mission specific) and then pointing to a specific SDLS green book subsection where this is discussed in more details. This would avoid confusion for implementers making it clear there is no specific recommendation
(should) or permission (may) for that subject in the Blue Book.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 3-7, 3-10 : SA management service: I would propose keeping subsection 3.4.2 intact (SA management service parameters).
Replace the NOTE in 3.4.3 (SA management service directives) by : “The directives for SA management will be specified in a CCSDS recommendation currently under development (355.1-B: SDLS extended procedures).” To be coherent with that, I would replace the
second sentence of subsection 3.4.1 by: “The service directives necessary<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">to manage the SA parameters will be specified in a CCSDS recommendation currently under development (355.1-B: SDLS extended procedures)”. As suggested
by Daniel, we could add a column in table 6-1 to indicate the correspondence between parameters denomination in subsection 3.4.2 and in Table 6-1.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 5-1: Peters comment: (no mention of payload in that section 5 “Use of the services with CCSDS protocols”). I would propose to show the “ApplySecurity
payload” in figures 5-1 (TM transfer frame), 5-2 (TC), 5-3 (AOS).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P 6-1 : OK to add unspecified (an unspecified management system). For the second comment (abstract SA data base) I tend to agree with Daniel, the
SA data base is not abstract . It has to be implemented both on-ground and on-board.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">P B-1 : OK to replace “user-supplied data unit” by “transfer frame data field” to make it unambiguous.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I hope we can converge with Peter on commonly agreed dispositions. We need to consolidate first our WG responses to his comments. Craig : let us
know your position wrt the comments, so we can produce a redline version of the document with our proposed dispositions and associated explanations inserted.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Gilles<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Gilles MOURY</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:#1F497D">
<br>
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">CNES Toulouse</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:#1F497D">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">De :</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Daniel.Fischer@esa.int [mailto:Daniel.Fischer@esa.int]
<br>
<b>Envoyé </b></span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> jeudi 13 août 2015 14:51<br>
<b>À :</b> Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez@esa.int<br>
<b>Cc :</b> Moury Gilles; sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org; sls-sea-dls-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org<br>
<b>Objet :</b> Re: [Sls-sea-dls] results of CESG poll for SDLS BB publication<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Dear Igancio and all,</span>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">I checked the comments as well. I agree to all you say below and I have a few more remarks/ first thoughts based on the comments that Peter put in-line in the document.</span>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">1) The word payload: While of course it has different meanings, the term "payload" is very well established in the communication protocol world. You can find the following definition e.g. on Wikipedia:
</span><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#2F2F2F">Payload</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#2F2F2F"> in </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computing"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:navy">computing</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#2F2F2F"> (sometimes
referred to as the actual or body data) is the cargo of a </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_transmission"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:navy">data transmission</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#2F2F2F">. It is the part of
the transmitted </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_(computing)"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:navy">data</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#2F2F2F"> which is the fundamental purpose of the transmission, to the exclusion of
information sent with it (such as </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Header_(computing)"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:navy">headers</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#2F2F2F"> or</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:navy">metadata</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#2F2F2F">,
sometimes referred to as overhead data) solely to facilitate delivery</span>. <br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">2) Regarding the inline comments:</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">P 1-1: I am not sure about both comments. Is this section not a standard CCSDS section? It reads like one. If yes, I would not bother modifying it.</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">P 1-3: See payload discussion</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">P 2-1: I am not sure I understand the comment. We simply state that SDLS is not associated with any other protocol and as an example we bring the SPP. This may be a misunderstanding. Perhaps Peter
confuses an association with another protocol (e.g. for extended procedures) with the concept of the underlying data-link layer protocol(s). If this causes too much discussion, we could even remove the note.</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">P 2-2: Following up on Ignacios comments, i would not include too much additional information here. We have the Green Book for that. Also, the other SLS books that have been updated mention SDLS
and how it fits in as well. </span><br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">P 2-8: OK, I can see where he is coming from regarding the comment on the counter rollover. However, I think the note is pretty clear on this by saying the interpretation is mission-specific. We
could think about being more concrete on this in the Green Book (if this is not already the case) and explain the benefits of not rolling over and how this can related to key lifetime.</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">P 3-7/3-10: I dont think that this section is an issue. Regarding the parameters, I think together with Section 6 (Managed Parameters) it makes sense to have them defined here. The only think that
I agree may cause confusion is the paramater naming. E.g: Section 3.4.2.2 says "SA_authentication_key" while Section 6 says "Authentication Key". Maybe we could add a column to the table on Section 6, referring to the names used in Section 3.4.2.2. Regarding
Section 3.4.3, I would almost be tempted to remove the Section from the standard (it is empty and the note will be out of date once the extended procedures...which are not a "revision" of the SDLS standard, but an addon...are out. We could pick this up in
the Green Book.</span> <br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">P 6-1: (1) Not sure why we should add "unspecified". Did he want to say st. like "not covered by this standard?"...TBD (2) The SA database is not abstract. In fact it has to be very concrete if
you want to do an implementation. Our prototype has one. </span><br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">3) I think we should seek to have telcon with Peter not too far in the future to discuss his comments and not wait three months for the next meetings. This way, we could speed up the publication
process a bit. What do you think?</span> <br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><br>
Cheers</span> <br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Daniel<br>
<br>
<br>
Dr. Daniel Fischer<br>
----------------------------<br>
Data Systems Manager<br>
Ground Systems Engineering Support Office<br>
Ground Systems Engineering Department<br>
Directorate of Human Spaceflight and Operations<br>
<br>
European Space Agency - ESOC<br>
Robert-Bosch-Str. 5<br>
D-64293 Darmstadt - Germany<br>
Tel: +49 (0) 6151 90 2718 - Fax: +49 (0) 6151 90 2718<br>
Web: </span><a href="http://www.esa.int/"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">http://www.esa.int</span></a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5F5F5F">From: </span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><a href="mailto:Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez@esa.int">Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez@esa.int</a></span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5F5F5F">To: </span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Moury Gilles <<a href="mailto:Gilles.Moury@cnes.fr">Gilles.Moury@cnes.fr</a>>,
</span><br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5F5F5F">Cc: </span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">"<a href="mailto:sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org">sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org">sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org</a>></span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5F5F5F">Date: </span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">13/08/2015 13:35</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5F5F5F">Subject: </span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Re: [Sls-sea-dls] results of CESG poll for SDLS BB publication</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5F5F5F">Sent by: </span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><a href="mailto:sls-sea-dls-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org">sls-sea-dls-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</a></span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" noshade="" style="color:#A0A0A0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
<br>
<tt><span style="font-size:10.0pt">Dear Gilles and colleagues,</span></tt><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New""><br>
<br>
<tt>I believe the comment from Tomaso, supported by Keith, is easy to deal with</tt><br>
<tt>the inclusion of such note.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Concerning Peter's comments,</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>1) We all agreed and supported harmonisation of the SDLS with the SLPs, Part</tt><br>
<tt>of the agreement was the assumption that the potential user shall start</tt><br>
<tt>reading the SLPs before getting to the SDLS (since it is a NEW optional SLP</tt><br>
<tt>function). And we (SLP WG + SDLS WG) were very careful in deciding what to</tt><br>
<tt>put where. This can explain why the SDLS does not read so well stand-alone,</tt><br>
<tt>as Peter seems to want.</tt><br>
<tt>Including the three different scenarios (TC, TM, AOS) with corresponding</tt><br>
<tt>drawings into the SDLS will substantially 'inflate' the introduction.</tt><br>
<tt>And will risk causing incoherency issues with the SLPs and the still-to-be</tt><br>
<tt>published SDLS Green Book.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>I think the issue needs to be re-discussed with Peter since the drawings are</tt><br>
<tt>already at the documents where they are supposed to be.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>2) The word 'payload' is mentioned 72 times in the document. The last mention</tt><br>
<tt>is in paragraph B1.1, which is perhaps the one that I can see somewhat</tt><br>
<tt>inconsistent but it should be easy to fix. Hence, I beg to disagree with</tt><br>
<tt>Peter concerning inconsistency in its use. A different thing is whether</tt><br>
<tt>another term could be used to avoid confusion with the classical meaning of</tt><br>
<tt>payload in space missions but I think the meaning in SDLS is pretty clear and</tt><br>
<tt>defined. On his proposals "package" looks too close to "packet" and "user</tt><br>
<tt>provided data" too close to "service data unit" (note that the 'payload' as</tt><br>
<tt>in SDLS context includes the SDU and something else, hence not a valid</tt><br>
<tt>substitute).</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Unless someone finds a clear and unambiguous term to replace 'payload' in the</tt><br>
<tt>SDLS context, I would advocate to re-discuss the comment with Peter.</tt><br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>3) If the document has to be self-standing concerning its interpretation,</tt><br>
<tt>this is definitely a section that I think should stay. It is addressing a</tt><br>
<tt>core element of the SDLS. The Green Book will provide further elaboration but</tt><br>
<tt>a bare minimum is needed to be able to understand and interpret SDLS.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>4) There are three NOTES covering this issue that are consistent. I think we</tt><br>
<tt>did not want to impose requirements in this subject, reason why they are</tt><br>
<tt>notes. But we could change it to requirements with the word 'may' to make</tt><br>
<tt>them more visible as suggested by Peter.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>I hope the above helps.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Kind regards,</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Ignacio</tt><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>From: Moury Gilles <<a href="mailto:Gilles.Moury@cnes.fr">Gilles.Moury@cnes.fr</a>></tt><br>
<tt>To: "<a href="mailto:sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org">sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org">sls-sea-dls@mailman.ccsds.org</a>></tt><br>
<tt>Date: 13/08/2015 11:01</tt><br>
<tt>Subject: [Sls-sea-dls] results of CESG poll for SDLS BB publication</tt><br>
<tt>Sent by: <a href="mailto:sls-sea-dls-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org">
sls-sea-dls-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org</a></tt><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>Dear CCSDS SDLS WG member,</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Please find attached 2 files:</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>The results of the CESG poll (as of today – it terminates tomorrow)</tt><br>
<tt>The commented version of the SDLS Blue Book attached to the comments of Peter</tt><br>
<tt>Shames (SEA AD)</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>We have to respond to those comments and resolve them with the issuer before</tt><br>
<tt>we can actually publish the BB. Please advise on the way to respond to those</tt><br>
<tt>comments.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Best regards,</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Gilles MOURY</tt><br>
<tt>SDLS WG Co-Chair</tt><br>
<tt> =========================================================</tt><br>
<tt> Gilles MOURY</tt><br>
<tt> CNES Toulouse</tt><br>
<tt> Expert senior "Plateforme Satellite"</tt><br>
<tt> Sous-Direction "Techniques Véhicule, Architecture & Intégration"</tt><br>
<tt> DCT/TV-RA - Bpi 1416</tt><br>
<tt> 18, avenue Edouard Belin</tt><br>
<tt> F-31401 TOULOUSE Cedex 9</tt><br>
<tt> </tt></span><a href="http://www.cnes.fr/"><tt><span style="font-size:10.0pt">http://www.cnes.fr</span></tt></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New""><br>
<tt> tel : +33 (0)5 61 27 3790</tt><br>
<tt> fax : +33 (0)5 61 27 4099</tt><br>
<tt> sec : +33 (0)5 61 27 3882</tt><br>
<tt> mob : +33 (0)6 83 56 0485</tt><br>
<tt> =========================================================</tt><br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>[attachment "results CESG SDLS BB poll.docx" deleted by Ignacio Aguilar</tt><br>
<tt>Sanchez/estec/ESA] [attachment "355x0b0_CESG_Approval-SEA.pdf" deleted by</tt><br>
<tt>Ignacio Aguilar Sanchez/estec/ESA]</tt><br>
<tt>_______________________________________________</tt><br>
<tt>SLS-SEA-DLS mailing list</tt><br>
<tt><a href="mailto:SLS-SEA-DLS@mailman.ccsds.org">SLS-SEA-DLS@mailman.ccsds.org</a></tt><br>
</span><a href="http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sls-sea-dls"><tt><span style="font-size:10.0pt">http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sls-sea-dls</span></tt></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New""><br>
<br>
<tt>This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.</tt><br>
<tt>The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its</tt><br>
<tt>content is not permitted.</tt><br>
<tt>If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.</tt><br>
<tt>Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Please consider the environment before printing this email.</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>_______________________________________________</tt><br>
<tt>SLS-SEA-DLS mailing list</tt><br>
<tt><a href="mailto:SLS-SEA-DLS@mailman.ccsds.org">SLS-SEA-DLS@mailman.ccsds.org</a></tt><br>
</span><a href="http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sls-sea-dls"><tt><span style="font-size:10.0pt">http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sls-sea-dls</span></tt></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>content is not permitted.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><o:p> </o:p></pre>
<pre>Please consider the environment before printing this email.<o:p></o:p></pre>
</div>
</body>
</html>