[Cesg-all] Results of CESG Polls closing 13 December 2024

[CCSDS Secretariat]

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2024-11-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 120.4-G-1, Robust Compression of Fixed-Length Housekeeping Data Packets—Summary of Concept and Rationale (Green Book, Issue 1)

Results of CESG poll beginning 29 November 2024 and ending 13 December 2024:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  3 (60%) (Lux, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  2 (40%) (Barkley, Cola)
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions):      Section 2.1, regarding the statement: "

The Recommended Standard exploits the slow variation of consecutive input data vectors over time…" -- can "slow variation" be guaranteed? Granted mostly like they are "slow", but what if they are not?  Should a clarifying sentence be added to indicate  what the implications are for "rapid" variation? In section 2.3 it does say "…depending on the input data and the user's selected parameters, output vectors may be longer than the corresponding input vectors; that

is, expansion may occur" is this more likely with rapidly varying data?   If that is the case, I think some sort of minor adjustment in section 2.1 would be good to indicate the potential for data expansion for rapidly varying data.

    Re selection of "POCKET+", I note that ESA also has something called "POCKET++" -- should this be considered?  Also, given that this is an ESA algorithm, are there are any patent considerations?  I don't see any listed but perhaps it would be good to expressly indicate that there are no patent considerations (assuming that is the case).
    Regarding table 6-1, I notice MiB is the unit identified -- okay, but perhaps worthwhile noting somewhere (could be a footnote, or listed in Annex C) that MiB is Mebibyte to make sure it is not confused with MB (Megabyte).

     Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions):  ​Just wondering why the content of section 3, which defines the algorithms with a certain level of detail, were not included in the companion blue book. 


Total Respondents:  5

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-2024-11-002 Approval to release CCSDS 722.1-P-1.1, CFDP Unitdata Transfer Layers (Pink Book, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review

Results of CESG poll beginning 29 November 2024 and ending 13 December 2024:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  4 (80%) (Lux, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  1 (20%) (Barkley)
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions):  The title of the magenta book has changed from its original release. The new title is "CFDP UNITDATA  TRANSFER LAYERS".  However, the header on each page carries the old title and says  "RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR OPERATION OF CFDP OVER ENCAPSULATION SERVICE".  Recommend editing the document to put the new title on each page header as needed.​


Total Respondents:  5

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-2024-11-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 141.0-B-2, Optical Communications Physical Layer (Blue Book, Issue 2)

Results of CESG poll beginning 29 November 2024 and ending 13 December 2024:

                 Abstain:  0 (0%)  
 Approve Unconditionally:  2 (40%) (Aguilar Sanchez, Wilmot)
 Approve with Conditions:  3 (60%) (Barkley, Lux, Cola)
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)  

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions):  1.   Minor editorial glitch -- Section 6.1, The statements "

This beacon signal can also be used, optionally, for data transmission. Center Frequencies." "should probably read 

"This beacon signal can also be used, optionally, for data transmission center frequencies." (especially as this is about On-Off Keying Beacon) 

     James Lux (Approve with Conditions):  To be approved, I think you have to have two implementations that demonstrate that the standard is clear enough to implement (documented in the book now), have the compliance matrix (also currently documented, although not necessarily in the PICS Pro Forma format), demonstrated it provides intended functionality (I think so, given that they were able to measure various parameters).  And the fourth condition, which is not met (or at least not documented), that the two (or more) implementations are nteroperable.

     Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions):  ​The provided yellow book should be about interoperability testing, i.e. giving evidence that there exist two independent and interoperable prototypes able to fulfill the items of the NPIC Annex of the blue book. For what I can see, the yellow book is more like a description of the available implementation, but without providing any interoperability testing, hence the requirement for approving the blue book is not met.

     Jonathan Wilmot (Approve Unconditionally):  ​The provided yellow book should be about interoperability testing, i.e. giving evidence that there exist two independent and interoperable prototypes able to fulfill the items of the NPIC Annex of the blue book. For what I can see, the yellow book is more like a description of the available implementation, but without providing any interoperability testing, hence the requirement for approving the blue book is not met.


Total Respondents:  5

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

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