[CESG] RE: "Recommended Standard" or "Standard"

Mon Aug 1 03:12:23 EDT 2011

I  just wanted to point out the reality of the way we are using the CCSDS
output these days. Adrian has some clear concerns, no problem from me to stay
as we are,
//ct

  From:       "Moury Gilles" <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>                                                                                                  

  To:         "Hooke, Adrian J (9000)" <adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov>, <Chris.Taylor at esa.int>                                                         

  Cc:         Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>                                                                                    

  Date:       30/07/2011 17:35                                                                                                                       

  Subject:    RE: [CESG] RE: "Recommended Standard" or "Standard"                                                                                    

  Sent by:    cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org                                                                                                         

For sure, nothing is broken there. If there are concerns about this
terminology change, we should stay as is.

Gilles MOURY
CNES Toulouse

De : Hooke, Adrian J (9000) [mailto:adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov]
Envoyé : vendredi 29 juillet 2011 20:20
À : Moury Gilles; Chris.Taylor at esa.int
Cc : Steering Group - CESG Exec
Objet : RE: [CESG] RE: "Recommended Standard" or "Standard"

I think that you guys may be playing with fire. Standards are developed by
accredited Standards Development Organizations (SDOs). Right now we feed our
CCSDS Recommended Standards to other SDOs (e.g., ECSS and ISO), who adopt
them as standards. If we set ourselves up as a Standards Development
Organization, are ESA and CNES willing to pay for the process of becoming
accredited by some other organization? NASA sure doesn’t: we are investing
25% of our budget in running the Secretariat, which handles our relationship
with other SDOs.

I believe that this falls into the category of “if it ain’t broke, why fix
it”. What exactly is broken here, and is it serious enough to potentially
uproot CCSDS and SC13 chartering issues which have been settled and working
smoothly for almost 30 years?

///adrian

From: cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org]
On Behalf Of Moury Gilles
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 11:35 AM
To: Chris.Taylor at esa.int; Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)
Cc: Thomas Gannett; CCSDS at esa-sf1.esa.gmessaging.net; Nestor.Peccia at esa.int;
Steering Group - CESG Exec
Subject: RE: [CESG] RE: "Recommended Standard" or "Standard"

Same for CNES : CCSDS standards are usually made directly applicable to
projects (with an applicability matrix if needed). As Chris wrote, we use to
rely on ESA-PSS standards which actually reformulated/repackaged CCSDS
recommendations. It is no more the case. The term "recommended" is both
historical and maybe still political because it implies a lower level of
commitment of CCSDS member agencies to actually apply those standards to
their projects.

Regards,
Gilles
 Gilles MOURY
CNES Toulouse

De : cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org]
De la part de Chris.Taylor at esa.int
Envoyé : vendredi 29 juillet 2011 16:52
À : Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)
Cc : Thomas Gannett; CCSDS at esa-sf1.esa.gmessaging.net; Steering Group - CESG
Exec; Nestor.Peccia at esa.int
Objet : Re: [CESG] RE: "Recommended Standard" or "Standard"
Chaps this goes back to the days where esa was preparing its own standard
based on ccsds but released under our pss series. These days have gone and
where possible we apply ccsds recs as is. In this respect no problem to
change to "standard" rather than recommended.
//ct

Sent from my iPad

On 28 Jul 2011, at 20:57, "Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)" <
mike.kearney at nasa.gov> wrote:
      You're right, Tom.  My memory was that we required "Recommended
      Standard" because simply "Standard" carried the weight of a "Required"
      compliance to the standard which invoked the more political
      requirements of international agreements (State department approval,
      etc.).

      I think I should handle that with a direct dialogue with Martin.

      If someone has a historical track record that would help substantiate
      the theory above, I would appreciate hearing from you.  I will address
      Martin next week.

         -=- Mike

      Mike Kearney
      NASA MSFC EO-01
      256-544-2029

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Thomas Gannett [mailto:tomg at aiaa.org]
      Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 1:11 PM
      To: Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)
      Cc: CCSDS at esa-sf1.esa.gmessaging.net; Steering Group - CESG Exec;
      Nestor.Peccia at esa.int; adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov
      Subject: RE: [CESG] PICS text in A02.1-Y-2.1d

      Mike:

       From the discussion this morning is appears that we may be very near
      to being able to publish the document, but there remains one
      problematic comment from DLR that needs an explicit response from the
      CMC:

      "DLR proposes to change recommended standards into standards, because
      DLR cannot see any additional value from the word recommended and in
      the end on the ISO level  we will have a standard."

      I believe a CMC poll is necessary to get consensus on the proposed
      change, since at one time there was strong objection from certain
      agencies to referring to CCSDS Blue Books as actual standards.

      I should point out that, as a practical matter, changing the term
      would not be a simple thing, since it would involve changing a
      massive number of templates, etc., in which the term is hard
      coded.  On the other hand I personally feel that, if we can get
      everyone to agree, it would be a positive change.

      Tom

      Thomas Gannett
      +1 410 793 7190

      _______________________________________________
      CESG mailing list
      CESG at mailman.ccsds.org
      http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg
      _______________________________________________
      CESG mailing list
      CESG at mailman.ccsds.org
      http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg