From: Shames, Peter M (US 312B) Sent: Monday, February 03, 2020 1:34 PM To: Moury Gilles Cc: Thomas Gannett; Daniel.Fischer@esa.int; Biggerstaff, Craig (JSC-CD42)[SGT, INC]; Weiss, Howard; Lucas, John P. (GSFC-5960); David Koisser (external); Ignacio Aguilar-Sanchez; Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] [CCSDS SDLS]: SDLS WG response to conditions put on SDLS EP 355.1-B publication poll Categories: Poll Condition Closure Dear Gilles, I have reviewed the changes to the test plan and Table 5-1 in the body of the document. I concur with all of these changes. My PIDs are resolved. Thanks, Peter From: Gilles Moury Date: Monday, February 3, 2020 at 7:43 AM To: Peter Shames Cc: Tom Gannett , "Daniel.Fischer@esa.int" , "Biggerstaff, Craig (JSC-CD42)[SGT, INC]" , Howie Weiss , "Lucas, John P. (GSFC-5960)" , "David Koisser (external)" , Ignacio Aguilar-Sanchez , Gian Paolo Calzolari Subject: [EXTERNAL] [CCSDS SDLS]: SDLS WG response to conditions put on SDLS EP 355.1-B publication poll Dear Peter, You have raised 5 PIDs during the CESG publication poll for SDLS EP Blue Book (355.1). Please find attached the answers to your PIDs prepared by the WG. Attached file are : - completed PIDs with dispositions - corresponding updated test report (with track change). Note figures 5-2, 5-3, A-1 and A-2 have been updated to answer PID 2, 3 and 4 - modified Table 5-1 for the blue book (answer to PID5) Best regards, Gilles Gilles MOURY SDLS WG Chair -----Message d'origine----- De : CESG-All De la part de CCSDS Secretariat Envoyé : vendredi 31 janvier 2020 19:10 À : cesg-all@mailman.ccsds.org Objet : [Cesg-all] Results of CESG Polls closing 29 January 2020 CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2019-12-005 Approval to publish CCSDS 355.1-B-1, Space Data Link Security Protocol—Extended Procedures (Blue Book, Issue 1) Results of CESG poll beginning 31 December 2019 and ending 29 January 2020: Abstain: 1 (20%) (Merri) Approve Unconditionally: 3 (60%) (Burleigh, Calzolari, Wilmot) Approve with Conditions: 1 (20%) (Shames) Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%) CONDITIONS/COMMENTS: Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): There are ambiguities in the test report and in the standard itself. Most critical is that the descriptions in Sec 5.3 are ambiguous and confusing until you study the details in Sec 5.4. This should be fixed. Total Respondents: 5 No response was received from the following Area(s): CSS SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed