<span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Dear All,</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">
the attached document is under CESG Poll.</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Since "</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:blue;font-family:sans-serif">The
document describes the relationship between SANA and the other stakeholders
within CCSDS, such as the CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG), the
CMC, WGs, and the CCSDS Secretariat</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">"
it is potentially affecting all your activities.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">For this reason
any comment (to be reflected in the SLS vote to the CESG Poll) is welcome
by <br>
13 February COB.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Thanks</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Gian Paolo</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">PS As preliminary
comments.....</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">1) I think
section 3.6. should be split between "WG Relationship" and "CESG
Relationship" as e.g. the very first sentence "</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:red;font-family:sans-serif">The
SANA Operator shall be informed by a WG of any new registries, or of changes
to existing registries, prior to when the WG submits the Red Book (or Pink
Sheet) for its first agency review</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">."
does affect WGs and not CESG. ACtually there is a section 3.10 for WGs
but thiss should be put earlier as WGs are the first to start interaction
with SANA.</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">2) Sentence "</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:red;font-family:sans-serif">The
CESG shall review the Candidate registry prior to approving the release
of the document for its first Agency review</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">."
is ambiguous as it looks there is dedicated review of the candidate review
while there is simply a CESG Poll to approve releasing a document - that
includes a SANA Annex - for Agency Review) </span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">3) Also the following
sentence "</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:red;font-family:sans-serif">When
clarifications or changes are required, they must be performed by the WG
prior to the request for approval of the document for Agency Review</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">"
is part of the actions after a failed CESG poll (rejected or approved with
conditions).</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">4) The sentence
"</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:red;font-family:sans-serif">This
last technical review will be done prior to CESG approval to publish</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">."
introduces an additional dedicated Review to be performed before the CESG
Poll for publication.</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">5) The final NOTE
in section 3.6 is just ambygous. Does CESG mean CESG Chair? Who will trigger
the verification on the SANA Beta site?</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">6) The contents
of the SANA Annex as describe din 3.9 (</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;color:red;font-family:sans-serif">The
SANA Considerations shall document all information needed for SANA to make
assignments or changes to, or to create new registries</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">.)
actually describe the interaction required with SABA before publication.
Is the reader of the published document interested in this or should the
annex rather describe which registries are avaiable after that process
and with which rules/constraints?</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">etc etc.</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
</span><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>