<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Peter,<br>
      <br>
         I understand that "managed" will be the initial approach
      similar to the compromise for spacecraft ID's being only unique
      within an assigned spectrum. Something we can do now is maybe have
      a version indication in the first byte(s) of the secondary header.
      And although I hate to say it, maybe even use an SDNV?<br>
      <br>
         Kind regards,<br>
      <br>
            Jonathan <br>
      <br>
      On 2/28/2019 10:51 AM, Shames, Peter M (312B) wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:0FBE6B71-25AA-4455-A30C-D3684464A70E@jpl.nasa.gov">
      <meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
        medium)">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal">Hi Jonathan,</p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
        <p class="MsoNormal">I get that you would like this, but that
          would mean changing all of the existing header structures that
          are already in wide use.  I think what we should do it to
          treat this like a "managed parameter" where you have to know
          which of the formats you are processing.</p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
        <p class="MsoNormal">That said, for any new / future formats you
          could certainly include some sort of standard "secondary
          header type" flag, but for current ones I think you must
          accept the "managed" approach.  Otherwise this will never get
          off the ground.</p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
        <p class="MsoNormal">Peter</p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span>From:
              </span></b><span>SLS-SLP
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sls-slp-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org"><sls-slp-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org></a> on behalf of
              Jonathan Wilmot via SLS-SLP
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"><sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org></a><br>
              <b>Reply-To: </b>"Wilmot, Jonathan J. (GSFC-5820)"
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov"><Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov></a><br>
              <b>Date: </b>Thursday, February 28, 2019 at 7:43 AM<br>
              <b>To: </b>Peter Shames
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov"><Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov></a>, Scott Burleigh
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov"><Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov></a>, "Greenberg, Edward"
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Edward.Greenberg@jpl.nasa.gov"><Edward.Greenberg@jpl.nasa.gov></a>,
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org">"sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"</a>
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"><sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org></a><br>
              <b>Cc: </b>Lee Pitts <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov"><robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov></a><br>
              <b>Subject: </b>Re: [Sls-slp] Call for Use Cases of Space
              Packet Protocol</span></p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal">Peter,<br>
            <br>
                If we have agreement I will start rapidly moving in that
            direction. The schema will be the SOIS EDS and SOIS DoT. 
            For true interoperability I think we need something in the
            headers that indicate which one of the secondary headers is
            being used so it can be parsed at run-time.<br>
            <br>
               Kind regards,<br>
            <br>
                    Jonathan<br>
            <br>
            On 2/28/2019 10:36 AM, Shames, Peter M (312B) wrote:</p>
        </div>
        <blockquote>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
              Hi Jonathan,</p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
               </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
              If there is a DEM to SPP mapping that uses the standard
              SPP headers and adds the DEM as a packet secondary header
              that would be entirely suitable.</p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
               </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
              I'd like to encourage something like a two level approach
              to this:</p>
            <p class="MsoListParagraph">
              <span>1.<span>      
                </span></span>A registry for each SPP secondary header
              that is registered, with org, contact person, name of the
              project, and a pointer to the documentation
            </p>
            <p class="MsoListParagraph">
              <span>2.<span>      
                </span></span>An XML schema (or JSON, your choice) that
              formalizes the secondary header structure, field names,
              data types, sizes, and definitions
            </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
               </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
              That way people can look it up, understand it, know where
              to find more info, etc.  And, as I suggested, using the
              DoT would lend a certain regularity to the typing of the
              data.</p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
               </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
              Does his make sense to you guys?  </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
               </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
              Thanks, Peter</p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
               </p>
            <p class="MsoNormal">
               </p>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal">
                <b>From: </b>SLS-SLP <a
                  href="mailto:sls-slp-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org"
                  moz-do-not-send="true"><sls-slp-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org></a>
                on behalf of Jonathan Wilmot via SLS-SLP
                <a href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"
                  moz-do-not-send="true"><sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org></a><br>
                <b>Reply-To: </b>"Wilmot, Jonathan J. (GSFC-5820)" <a
                  href="mailto:Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov"
                  moz-do-not-send="true">
                  <Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov></a><br>
                <b>Date: </b>Thursday, February 28, 2019 at 7:28 AM<br>
                <b>To: </b>Peter Shames <a
                  href="mailto:Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov"
                  moz-do-not-send="true"><Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov></a>,
                Scott Burleigh
                <a href="mailto:Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov"
                  moz-do-not-send="true"><Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov></a>,
                "Greenberg, Edward"
                <a href="mailto:Edward.Greenberg@jpl.nasa.gov"
                  moz-do-not-send="true"><Edward.Greenberg@jpl.nasa.gov></a>,
                <a href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"
                  moz-do-not-send="true">"sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"</a>
                <a href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"
                  moz-do-not-send="true">
                  <sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org></a><br>
                <b>Cc: </b>Lee Pitts <a
                  href="mailto:robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov"
                  moz-do-not-send="true"><robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov></a><br>
                <b>Subject: </b>Re: [Sls-slp] Call for Use Cases of
                Space Packet Protocol</p>
            </div>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal">
                 </p>
            </div>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal">
                Peter and folks<br>
                <br>
                     I agree with Peter's approach and would welcome
                moving forward with this. Hopefully  before the missions
                finalize their implementation.
                <br>
                <br>
                   As I remember, the DEM did not adopt the SPP format
                but they did contain the same type of meta data that
                ECSS-PUS and the SPP proposal contain.  The mapping
                between the Orion DEM and the SPP proposal format has
                been done and is in use at JSC for the LOP-G prototyping
                efforts. <br>
                <br>
                  Kind regards,<br>
                <br>
                    Jonathan <br>
                <br>
                On 2/28/2019 10:14 AM, Shames, Peter M (312B) wrote:</p>
            </div>
            <blockquote>
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                  Folks,</p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                   </p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                  What we have proposed in the SPP revision is to create
                  a SANA registry for local, agency, or even
                  multi-agency packet secondary headers.  This could
                  include PUS, MAL packet mapping, Jonathan's LOP-G
                  headers, and others.  There is a proposal for a simple
                  registry structure in the draft SPP doc that would
                  allow all of these to be registered.  I suggest that
                  you look at this and propose any needed metadata for
                  the registry.  You could try and engage in some sort
                  of "normalization" effort for the field names,
                  structures, and contents, or at least try and do some
                  sort of evaluation of the kinds of data and the
                  different ways they are named and represented.  I'll
                  bet you will find that they are all over the map.</p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                   </p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                  By the way, the SOIS Dictionary of Terms (DoT) may
                  prove to be useful as a source of standardized terms.</p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                   </p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                  Lastly, as I recall the Constellation DEM did not
                  adhere to the SPP at all.  I may be mis-remembering.</p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                   </p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                  Cheers, Peter</p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                   </p>
                <p class="MsoNormal">
                   </p>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">
                    <b>From: </b>SLS-SLP <a
                      href="mailto:sls-slp-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"><sls-slp-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org></a>
                    on behalf of Jonathan Wilmot via SLS-SLP
                    <a href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"><sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org></a><br>
                    <b>Reply-To: </b>"Wilmot, Jonathan J. (GSFC-5820)"
                    <a href="mailto:Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov"
                      moz-do-not-send="true">
                      <Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov></a><br>
                    <b>Date: </b>Thursday, February 28, 2019 at 7:03 AM<br>
                    <b>To: </b>Scott Burleigh <a
                      href="mailto:Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"><Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov></a>,
                    "Greenberg, Edward"
                    <a href="mailto:Edward.Greenberg@jpl.nasa.gov"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"><Edward.Greenberg@jpl.nasa.gov></a>,
                    <a href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"
                      moz-do-not-send="true">"sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"</a>
                    <a href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"
                      moz-do-not-send="true">
                      <sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org></a><br>
                    <b>Cc: </b>Peter Shames <a
                      href="mailto:Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"><Peter.M.Shames@jpl.nasa.gov></a>,
                    Lee Pitts
                    <a href="mailto:robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"><robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov></a><br>
                    <b>Subject: </b>Re: [Sls-slp] Call for Use Cases of
                    Space Packet Protocol</p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">
                     </p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">
                    Ed, Scott,<br>
                    <br>
                       The CCSDS Space Packet is being used at NASA, ESA
                    and CAST as end user application command and
                    telemetry message. It contains information in the
                    primary and secondary headers to allow end user
                    applications to identify the data content and
                    format, and also allow mission architecture specific
                    lower layers to transport user application data
                    within a subnetworks or across networks.
                    <br>
                    <br>
                       As part of this discussion I would like to
                    re-submit a proposal to create a secondary header
                    that could be included as an optional header in the
                    SPP Blue book or registered in SANA as a standard
                    SPP secondary header type. (ECSS-PUS headers should
                    also be registered)<br>
                    <br>
                    Note:  The LOP-G program,  and other missions at 
                    JSC, GSFC, and ARC,  are  currently using the format
                    in the attached proposal.  This is an opportunity
                    for CCSDS to  improve mission interoperability by
                    supporting the SPP uses cases that missions require.<br>
                    <br>
                      Kind Regards,<br>
                    <br>
                          Jonathan<br>
                    <br>
                    Jonathan Wilmot<br>
                    NASA/GSFC<br>
                    CCSDS SOIS Area Director<br>
                    <br>
                    On 4/22/2018 12:16 PM, Burleigh, Scott C (312B)
                    wrote:</p>
                </div>
                <blockquote>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      Ed, I think of the Space Packet as being the thing
                      that the old Constellation project called a Data
                      Exchange Message (DEM).  I think it performs the
                      same function in the stack, and I suspect that it
                      could easily carry all the same metadata that the
                      DEM was supposed to carry.</p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                       </p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      Scott</p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                       </p>
                    <div>
                      <div>
                        <p class="MsoNormal">
                          <b>From:</b> Greenberg, Edward (312B) <br>
                          <b>Sent:</b> Sunday, April 22, 2018 7:37 AM<br>
                          <b>To:</b> <a
                            href="mailto:sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org"
                            moz-do-not-send="true">sls-slp@mailman.ccsds.org</a>;
                          <a href="mailto:Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov"
                            moz-do-not-send="true">Jonathan.J.Wilmot@NASA.gov</a><br>
                          <b>Cc:</b> Lee Pitts <a
                            href="mailto:robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov"
                            moz-do-not-send="true"><robert.l.pitts@nasa.gov></a><br>
                          <b>Subject:</b> Call for Use Cases of Space
                          Packet Protocol</p>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                       </p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      There seems to be lots of new Use Cases for Space
                      Packets then were considered in the original
                      specification. For example:</p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      ·         ESA has PUS </p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      ·         Space Station has its own secondary
                      header </p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      ·         Orion is looking for a secondary header
                    </p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      Originally the Space Packet was an envelope for
                      data transferred over single link (includes
                      tunneling), now the packet is being looked at for
                      network data transfer, local onboard data transfer
                      (including measurement broadcasting).
                    </p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      It is possible that the role of the packet might
                      change with the use of DTN bundles.</p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      Just to take the broadest view: We currently have
                      two forms of packets, should there be more or
                      should even these be examined to determine if they
                      should be blended  into a new packet design. 
                    </p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      Can we get each of you to send in your present and
                      possibly desired Use Cases for our beloved Space
                      Packet so that we could determine its future.
                    </p>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
                <p> </p>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <p> </p>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
        <p> </p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p><br>
    </p>
  </body>
</html>