[Cesg-all] RE: Why is SLS-SLP the Review Authority for the SCPS-TP Extended Capability Binding Space Identifiers?

[Shames, Peter M (312B)]

Keith,

I agree that the SIS area should be the Review Authority for all of these SCPS registries.  I'll ask the SANA and the SSG to review and recommend the change unless anyone has an objection.

Are there any objections or issues with this?

Thanks, Peter


From: <Scott>, Keith Scott <kscott at mitre.org<mailto:kscott at mitre.org>>
Date: Monday, March 30, 2015 at 4:20 PM
To: CCSDS Secretariat <secretariat at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:secretariat at mailman.ccsds.org>>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All <cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org>>, Greg Kazz <Greg.J.Kazz at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Greg.J.Kazz at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Subject: [Cesg-all] RE: Why is SLS-SLP the Review Authority for the SCPS-TP Extended Capability Binding Space Identifiers?

Seems to be the same for all the SCPS registries.  Maybe because SLS-SLP is an extant WG?

                        --keith

From: Scott, Keith L.
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 4:20 PM
To: Secretariat at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:Secretariat at mailman.ccsds.org>; CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All (cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org>); greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Why is SLS-SLP the Review Authority for the SCPS-TP Extended Capability Binding Space Identifiers?

Shouldn’t the review authority for http://sanaregistry.org/r/scps_tp_extended_capability_id/scps_tp_extended_capability_id.html

Be the SIS area, not SLS-SLP?

                        --keith

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20150401/59abb827/attachment.html>