[CESG] RASIM Green book question

Hooke, Adrian J (9000) adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov
Wed Nov 21 13:56:10 EST 2012

Peter: as you have seen, the poll has raised a lot of questions about the intent of the document, especially since most of us assumed that it was dead.

Personally, I believe that the document represents a lot of hard work, by good technical people, that does deserve some public exposure. But it also desperately needs a big fat disclosure page, up front, that clearly describes its status, scope and open items/issues. The only worse sin that we can commit than putting out bad guidance is to put out partial, ambiguous  or misleading guidance.

So as a way forward I suggest that we suspend the poll while you draft such a "warning!" page, taking into account Gippo's specific comments, and circulate that page back to the CESG for comments. Then Tom can glue-in that page and put out a revised document, at which time polling can resume. Are you willing to go that route?

On Nov 20, 2012, at 5:30 PM, "Shames, Peter M (313B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>> wrote:

We're not resurrecting work nor trying to surreptiiously re-start the WG.    We're not "backing into" anything.  As I stated, the doc has been in the tech editor queue for more than 6 months, waiting patiently on higher priority Magenta & Blue books.

What we are trying to do is to get published the one artifact that we have from this work.  A lot of effort went into it and it did have support and review by a number of people, both in ISA and in IPR.

Rather than just letting that effort go to waste I want it to see the light of day.  Nothing more, nothing less.


From: <Hooke>, Adrian Hooke <Adrian.J.Hooke at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Adrian.J.Hooke at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Date: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 2:01 PM
To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: RE: [CESG] RASIM Green book question

Folks: before we all get too carried away, we need to remember that this working group and its program of work has already been very firmly shut down by the CMC for lack of resources. Has something changed? Are we suddenly flush with new cash? If so, where did it come from and who has it?

If we don’t have new and adequate resources, we should not be discussing the resurrection of this work. If we do, then we need to start off at the BOF stage and charter a new working group. But backing into this in the way that seems to be being proposed below seems imprudent. If you guys want to go ahead and vote on whether or not to publish the Green Book just to document past work – without any reviews – that’s one thing. But if you want to use that opportunity as a launch pad for surreptitiously re-starting the working group then that’s a different kettle of fish. If anything, the resource situation seems to be getting worse: so why are you even entertaining this?

Best regards

From: secretariat-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:secretariat-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> [mailto:secretariat-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Barkley, Erik J (3170)
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 1:01 PM
To: Shames, Peter M (313B); Nestor.Peccia at esa.int<mailto:Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>
Cc: cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>; cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [Secretariat] RE: [CESG] RASIM Green book question

Nestor, Peter,

My original question was more with the understanding option 2 -- this is on a green book track and so therefore it is, by definition more of a concept than anything else. But I believe it is an interesting concept and that it does propose some interrelated sets of architecture which I believe CCSDS may wish to study and find to be useful in CCSDS wide systems engineering considerations. I believe that my question as to what to do next is in fact already beginning to be answered by some of these discussions. To the extent that this helps sort out rather complex ideas I believe we should be taking a look. After all, this effort is the result of what I recall being a rather serious set of meetings/discussion in 2009 and an agreement that we needed something like this.  I believe it would be in the best interest of CCSDS to continue to address these issues – my sense is that missions are only going to get more complex.  From the perspective of the CSSS AD  I can see issues emerging as we starting talking about the generic file transfer service in CSS  – you immediately, in effect have a data repository that needs to be managed – this is not really quite the same thing as the MOIMS SM+C directory service but they more than likely are related?  But how are they related?   I believe it will be of use to have a general, well understood CCSDS wide information management conceptual architecture in mind.

Best regards,


From:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> [mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Shames, Peter M (313B)
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 11:35 AM
To: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int<mailto:Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>
Cc: cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>; cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: Re: [CESG] RASIM Green book question

Hi Nestor,

I am a little confused by some parts of your request, but will answer as best I can.  The first part is that since it is a Green Book, not Magenta nor Blue, there is little that can be said by way of compliance.  It contains no "shall" statements, it is informational.  At the same time I think it does offer some very useful overall guidance about how to think about the relationships among information, information models, and data storage and access objects such as repositories, registries, and archives.  This is not a "PDS design", but it does reference PDS and a number ofo ther systems in the US and Europe.  If it is deficient on coverage of other European systems that would be due to a lack of adequate participation in the WG, but several different systems are covered.

The concepts, overall, are clearly articulatedbut are not tied to any specific implementation or framework.

The capabilities covered in this document are largely relevant for distributed ground data systems.  It does not specifically address command and control systems.  I suspect that many of the concepts, as presented, are relevant for comand and control systems, but it was not the intent to directly address real-time performance and related considerations.

I do not understand your reference to "its relation with the spacecraft information model (an E-2-E CCSDS info model)".  Just which "E-2-E CCSDS info model" are you making reference to?  I know of no such document by that title (or anything related to that).

I think the answer to your question of "Is it Option 2 or Option 2" (see highlights below), is yes, I think it is Option 2.

I do think that if there are major issues we should identify them now and fix them if within reason.  I do not forsee a "SEA RASIM compliance test" in the future, but do think that if there are good, well stated, and useful current practice concepts we should be considering adopting them where they will be of benefit.

I hope that clarifies things.

Regards, peter

From: Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int<mailto:Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>>
Date: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 12:29 AM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Cc: Adrian Hooke <Adrian.J.Hooke at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Adrian.J.Hooke at jpl.nasa.gov>>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>, "cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>" <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: Re: [CESG] RASIM Green book question

One thing that you need to clarify is its future usage (as already asked by Erik and Adrian)

  1.  Option 1: If SEA will come in the future asking every WG to apply it, we have a problem. Why ? The doc needs probably to be reworked

  1.  Option 2: If SEA asks for considering it as a reference but something not to be compliant with, the issue is simpler.

Option1 is related to the RASSIM and how considers the Command & Control part (a data system with activities, report and events) and its relation with the spacecraft information model (an E-2-E CCSDS info model)

As RASIM was initially based on a PDS design (i.e., its archives, the OAIS model,  its submission / retrieval packages. its query search capabilities, etc.) has some deficiencies vis a vis the above mentioned C&C details.

So, please specify how SEA wants to proceed.

If it is option 2, MOIMS will invest limited resources
If it is option2, MOIMS will invest more resources, but the potential conditions will imply additional resurces from the SEA Area

Please let us know your views

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20121121/b381fe8c/attachment-0001.htm

More information about the CESG mailing list