[CESG] Magenta, Blue and Profiles

[Shames, Peter M (313B)]

Adrian, et al,

In general I agree completely with this approach.  I do have three comments, however:

 1.  Application profile is a perfectly good term of art that is also reflected in the ISO PICS document I referenced earlier.  Relabeling it "utilization profile" does not in any way change the nature of the specification.
 2.  For a Utilization Profile we will need a set of guidelines that reflect just what the expected structure and content are to be, and what testing must be done.
 3.  Similarly, for an Adaptation Profile we will need a set of guidelines that reflect just what the expected structure and content are to be, and what testing must be done.

I also note that this change will clear up an issue in the current draft CCSDS Procedures Yellow Book that addressed the need to do implementation testing of Application Profile Magenta Books.  With Application Profiles changed to Blue Books there should be no need to mandate interoperability testing for any Magenta Books, but I believe that the general requirement on "implementation experience", should remain for Magenta Books:


Sec B2.3.c, CCSDS Recommended Practice (Magenta Book)


Converting a CCSDS Draft Practice to a CCSDS Recommended Practice is always preceded by a successful formal agency review. Generally, only a specification for which significant implementation experience has been obtained may be elevated to the CCSDS Recommended Practice level. The WG chair is responsible for documenting the specific implementations that qualify the specification for advancement.


Regards, Peter


From: Adrian Hooke <Adrian.J.Hooke at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Adrian.J.Hooke at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:42:58 -0700
To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: [CESG] Magenta, Blue and Profiles

I’d like to try to wrap up a discussion that we had in February, where I believe that we had reached consensus on the following:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


1.      The litmus test between a Blue Book and a Magenta Book is as follows.

a.      If a document has interoperability properties, and;

b.      If it is directly implementable (i.e., two people could independently read the specification, each produce an independent implementations and it could be realistically expected that those two implementations would interoperate), and;

c.       If it clearly needs to be tested.
Then it is a Blue Book. If not, it is a Magenta Book.


2.      Within the Blue Book category there are three types of standard:

a.      CCSDS Recommended Standard (something that internally contains a native specification developed by CCSDS)

b.      CCSDS Recommended Standard: Adaptation Profile (something that adopts/adapts a native specification developed somewhere else, such as by another standards organization)

c.       CCSDS Recommended Standard: Utilization Profile (something that specifies how to use one or more existing CCSDS Blue Books to perform a particular function)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Any disagreements? If not, we should adopt these guidelines as our working terms of reference and incorporate into the ongoing update to the Procedures Manual. The term "application profile" should then deprecated and removed from the description of Recommended Practices in our terminology.
Best regards,
Adrian

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20110415/6a4d9e9d/attachment.html