[Cesg-all] Results of CESG Polls closing 10 July 2023

Tue Jul 11 19:35:44 UTC 2023

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-004 Approval to release CCSDS 142.0-P-1.1, Non-Coherent Optical Communications Coding and Synchronization (Pink Sheets, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  2 (50%) (Barkley, Aguilar Sanchez)
 Approve with Conditions:  2 (50%) (Cola, Wilmot)
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Erik Barkley (Approve Unconditionally):  Just a comment: the CSS Area needs to pay attention to the tables in section 7 for eventual inclusion of the managed parameters in the FRM (Functional Resource Model).

     Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions):  1) I understand that this is a pink sheet, so that only the amended or new sections are included for the review. However I find this may complicate the life of reviewers during the agency review. Just to me clearer, Sections 1 and 2 are both addressing HPE and O3K, so that having the full new version of section 2 would have been desirable. Then in particular, at the beginning of the excerpt of section 2 kept here, it is mentioned that some functions are for HPE, some for O3K, some for both. Why not making this more explicit, i..e which functions belon to what? Then, the following desription seems to be limited only on HPE, nothing to report about O3K?

2) Section 4 containts pointers to section 3, which as mentioned above is not reported here because not touched by this pink sheet. However it implies that reviewers have to go back and forth from this and the currently published version of the book.

3) ISLFrame is not defined (it only appears in a diagram and nothing more).

4) The cover and the history of the document report issue 1, but in fact this should be issue 2.

     Jonathan Wilmot (Approve with Conditions):  Related to Erik’s comment
     Managed parameters should be more formally specified in in the section 7 tables. Maybe this is to be done in the FRM? If users of this standard write software to export and ingest interoperable MIBs, how do they define the data types? 
    From table 7-4, is “AOS/USLP transfer frame length (octets)” an integer (which can be positive or negative) or an unsigned integer range 0 to 65536. Is the managed parameter name an ASCII string with spaces? Is “Input block length, k” represented in the MIB as “Input block length “, or “k”? Are the values unsigned integers or ASCII strings of “64”, “256”, “1024”?  
    For interoperable MIBs (machine readable), there must be agreement on parameter names, data types, and values. If the approach is to specify them as an FRM in SANA, then there should be a note and link to them in this document.  In the past these parameters were written into paper ICDs and interpreted by humans (sometimes incorrectly) The modern approach should be to make them machine readable and formally define in a FRM.

Total Respondents:  4

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA
     MOIMS

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-005 Approval to publish CCSDS 142.10-O-1, Reed-Solomon Product Code for Optical Communication (Orange Book, Issue 1)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  2 (50%) (Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  2 (50%) (Barkley, Cola)
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions):  Pg 3-1 Figure 3-1 -- for clarity, in figure 3-1, suggest changing the box labeled "8b10b" to be "8b/10b Encoding"

     Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions):  1) References [8] and [9] in section 1.8 do not appear to be normative (i.e. not recalled in the experimental specification part).

2) Section 2.1: the scope of the recommendation is state to be for spacecraft altitude at 1000-5000 km. Why nothing below 1000 km? Then aftewards still in Section 2.1 it is stated that the specification can apply also to longer distances. Up to deep space then?

3) Clause 3.2.3: Note 1 reports about supporting non-CCSDS frames (I guess those subject then to GFP), then note 2 clarifies this may also happen through USLP multiplexing (I guess as user defined octet stream isn't it?). Wouldn't it better to have a note about CCSDS frames overall and then another one saying how one could support non-CCSDS protocols?

4) Annex B: it is claimed that an bit error rate simulations were conducted over AWGN channel with a fading channel: what does it mean exactly?

5) Annex B: where can one find evidence that the proposed scheme really works as stated? The Annex B title is about simulation results, but I cannot see any reported results in fact. If these are available in existing documents, please add reference to them. 

Total Respondents:  4

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA
     MOIMS

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-006 Approval to publish CCSDS 911.1-B-5, Space Link Extension—Return All Frames Service Specification (Blue Book, Issue 5)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  5 (100%) (Barkley, Fischer, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)  
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Jonathan Wilmot (Approve Unconditionally):  Appreciate the specification of “Data Type Definitions” (MIB?) in Annex A in ASN.1, but it highlights the inconsistent approaches different areas have taken for parameter definition. It also seems that these definitions should be registered in SANA and maybe used a FRM.

Total Respondents:  5

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-007 Approval to publish CCSDS 911.2-B-4, Space Link Extension—Return Channel Frames Service Specification (Blue Book, Issue 4)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  5 (100%) (Barkley, Fischer, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)  
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

Total Respondents:  5

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-008 Approval to publish CCSDS 911.5-B-4, Space Link Extension—Return Operational Control Fields Service Specification (Blue Book, Issue 4)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  5 (100%) (Barkley, Fischer, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)  
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

Total Respondents:  5

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-009 Approval to publish CCSDS 912.1-B-5, Space Link Extension—Forward CLTU Service Specification (Blue Book, Issue 5)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  5 (100%) (Barkley, Fischer, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)  
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

Total Respondents:  5

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-010 Approval to publish CCSDS 350.9-G-2, CCSDS Cryptographic Algorithms (Green Book, Issue 2)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  2 (50%) (Barkley, Aguilar Sanchez)
 Approve with Conditions:  2 (50%) (Cola, Wilmot)
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions):  1) Last row of Table 4-1, last column, I read '512+'. I interpret this as >=512. I'd suggest this notation instead, unless there is a different reason to put '512+'

     Jonathan Wilmot (Approve with Conditions):  On Figure 3-1 there is a note "Reprint permission pending" Does this impact publishing the CCSDS document?

Total Respondents:  4

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA
     MOIMS

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-011 Reconfirmation of CCSDS 122.0-B-2, Image Data Compression (Blue Book, Issue 2, September 2017)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  4 (100%) (Barkley, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)  
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

Total Respondents:  4

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA
     MOIMS

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-012 Reconfirmation of CCSDS 122.1-B-1, Spectral Preprocessing Transform for Multispectral and Hyperspectral Image Compression (Blue Book, Issue 1, September 2017)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  4 (100%) (Barkley, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)  
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

Total Respondents:  4

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA
     MOIMS

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2023-06-013 Reconfirmation of CCSDS 131.5-O-1, Erasure Correcting Codes for Use in Near-Earth and Deep-Space Communications (Orange Book, Issue 1, November 2014)

Results of CESG poll beginning 26 June 2023 and ending 10 July 2023:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  4 (100%) (Barkley, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)  
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

Total Respondents:  4

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA
     MOIMS

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *