[CESG] FW: CFDP over Enacap

[Thomas Gannett]

Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 722x1r1_DS_2810133.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 2865664 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20131218/399ad6d9/722x1r1_DS_2810133-0001.doc
-------------- next part --------------
                    REVIEW ITEM DISPOSITION (RID):
                    RED BOOK RID INITIATION FORM

AGENCY RID NUMBER:
SUBMITTING ORGANIZATION (Agency, Center): 
------------------------------------------------------------------
REVIEWER'S NAME:   John Pietras
CODE:              
E-MAIL ADDRESS:    john.pietras at gst.com
TELEPHONE:         
------------------------------------------------------------------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:   CCSDS 722.1-R-1               Red Book, Issue 1
DOCUMENT NAME:     Operation of CFDP over Encapsulation Service
DATE ISSUED:       December 2012
PAGE NUMBER:       B-2          PARAGRAPH NUMBER:  Table B-1
RID SHORT TITLE:   Change Uplink/Downlink to Forward/Return
------------------------------------------------------------------
DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED CHANGE:  (Use From: "..." To "..." format)

In The Name column of table B-1, change ?Uplink? to Forward Link? and ?Downlink? to ?Return Link?.








------------------------------------------------------------------
CATEGORY OF REQUESTED CHANGE:
     Technical Fact ___    Recommended ___    Editorial _X_
NOTES:
TECHNICAL FACT:  Major technical change of sufficient magnitude as to
 render the Recommendation inaccurate and unacceptable if not
 corrected.  (Supporting analysis/rationale is essential.)
RECOMMENDED:  Change of a nature that would, if incorporated, produce
 a marked improvement in document quality and acceptance.
EDITORIAL:  Typographical or other factual error needing correction.
 (This type of change will be made without feedback to submitter.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPORTING ANALYSIS:

The uplink/downlink terminology was superseded by the more-general and encompassing forward/return with the advent of geosynchronous relay satellite networks such as TDRSS. The forward and return link terminology has been in use in CCSDS since AOS. Finally, table B-2 uses Forward and Return, and this change would make the two table consistent.


------------------------------------------------------------------
DISPOSITION:


                    REVIEW ITEM DISPOSITION (RID):
                    RED BOOK RID INITIATION FORM

AGENCY RID NUMBER:
SUBMITTING ORGANIZATION (Agency, Center): 
------------------------------------------------------------------
REVIEWER'S NAME:   John Pietras
CODE:              
E-MAIL ADDRESS:    john.pietras at gst.com
TELEPHONE:         
------------------------------------------------------------------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:   CCSDS 722.1-R-1               Red Book, Issue 1
DOCUMENT NAME:     Operation of CFDP over Encapsulation Service
DATE ISSUED:       December 2012
PAGE NUMBER:       3-2         PARAGRAPH NUMBER:  3.4
RID SHORT TITLE:   Data Unit Loss Flag in CFDP UT Address
------------------------------------------------------------------
DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED CHANGE:  (Use From: "..." To "..." format)

Change 3.4.3 from:
?The CFDP UT Address shall contain the SDLP_Channel, PVN, EPI and (if Space Packets are used by the Encapsulation service) Data Loss Flag.?
To:
?The CFDP UT Address shall contain the SDLP_Channel, PVN, and EPI.?

Add another requirement under 3.4:
?If Space Packets are used by the Encapsulation service, the optional Data Loss Flag shall not be enabled in the Encapsulation Service.?

------------------------------------------------------------------
CATEGORY OF REQUESTED CHANGE:
     Technical Fact ___    Recommended ___    Editorial ___
NOTES:
TECHNICAL FACT:  Major technical change of sufficient magnitude as to
 render the Recommendation inaccurate and unacceptable if not
 corrected.  (Supporting analysis/rationale is essential.)
RECOMMENDED:  Change of a nature that would, if incorporated, produce
 a marked improvement in document quality and acceptance.
EDITORIAL:  Typographical or other factual error needing correction.
 (This type of change will be made without feedback to submitter.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPORTING ANALYSIS
Section 3.4.1 states
?CFDP UT Address = Encapsulation SDLP_Channel+PVN+EPI?.

The last paragraph of section 3.3 states ?The Data Unit Loss Flag ?may be used only if the Space Packet is used for encapsulation. This parameter, if present, is ignored by implementations of this specification

Even if the Data Unit Loss were to be generated by the Encapsulation service, it would be ignored by CFDP. So to define the CFDP UT Address as having a component that CFDP can?t even see is illogical. In any case, the definitions of CFDP UT Address in 3.4.1 and 3.4.3 are different and need to be reconciled.

------------------------------------------------------------------
DISPOSITION: