[CESG] Updates to ICS Pro Forma presentations

[Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int]

Nestor, Peter,
        the point about Pink sheets/books looks to me quite risky and I 
would avoid any mandatory statement for PICS/ICS in revised books.
The WG Chairs are complaining about resources and Having (P)ICS mandatory 
also for revisions would only increase resource and duration  requirements 
(with possible implied delays) that may impact the benefits given by the 
revision.

Regards

Gian Paolo 




From:
Nestor.Peccia at esa.int
To:
"Shames, Peter M (313B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc:
CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Date:
08-11-11 23:36
Subject:
Re: [CESG] Updates to ICS Pro Forma presentations
Sent by:
cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org



Peter, 
My comments 

I'm not clear what you are saying here.  The first part says "I would 
personally recommend to apply this only to Projects that start after this 
date,".  But then the second part says "It means that even if the Project 
is in the CWE but no WB has been drafted, an ICS is compulsory". 

I take this to mean that if a project is in the CWE, but there is no White 
Book, then the ICS is required.  This does mean that if a WG has started 
and they only have a White Paper that an ICS is mandatory.  However, if 
they have drafted a White Book, I.e. A draft red Book, then this is no 
longer the case.   
[Nestor] Agreed, but WB versions and draft RB needs to be analysed in a 
case by case base . If a WG is at WB V6 (as CDM) but not at draft RB 
status, ICS (for me) is not mandatory 


I think that this is clear enough, but do want to acknowledge that we may 
have new WGs, or new projects in a WG, that is in White Book form but at a 
low level of maturity.  If a project still has a year or more to go before 
it can hope to be standardized I would think that the cost / schedule 
impact of adding an ICS is low and that the benefit is relatively high.   

Would you all agree? 

[Nestor] Agreed in principle, but CDM and other books are at this level. 

That is what I recall as well.  But here too I would ask that we clarify 
that corrigenda and Pink Sheets are for relatively minor updates.   If a 
book undergoes enough of a revision to be issued as a new version I think 
we should consider adding an ICS, for exactly the same cost / benefit 
reasons stated earlier.  We could state in eithr case that a waiver may be 
requested, but I think the basic policy should be to add the ICS in this 
case. 

Can we agree? 

[Nestor] agreed in principle, but the CESG Chairs needs to have the 
authority to give a waiver depending of the WG chair / AD request. 

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20111109/218d24c5/attachment.html