[CESG] Re: RID responses for SCCS ADD GB, 901.0-G-0.1

Mon Jul 8 07:59:48 EDT 2013

Peter,
        first of all best wishes to enjoy your vacation!

Here below some comments about your extensive work.
My main issue is about clarifying what we (CCSDS) mean for the newly added 
"(SSI) POSITION SERVICES" and possibly the relationship to e.g. 
radiometric services, contact plans, etc.

Regards

Gippo

1) I am not sure the comment on page 1-5 for Coding Sublayer is really 
addressed in your answer. My proposal was to mention also the Protocol 
Sublayer of the Data Link layer.
2) Page 1-8 and previous ones for CSTS. I think that the difference 
SLE/CSTS is not really captured; i.e. they provide the same data (whent 
both are available) but using different technology. Erik (and Margherita) 
may comment better and propose text.
3) Page 30 (of the pdf file) you propose:  <"The term 'planet" is used in 
a general sense throughout this document, in reference to any natural 
celestial object, including the Earth.> I would replace Earth with Moon as 
Earth is a planet and Moon is not.
4) On page 67 you say <In the SSI position is something other than just 
radiometric data, which is observables vs the result of analysis.> I could 
agree on this, but we have no position services identified for this 
neither in IOAG nor in CCSDS; i.e. the discrepancy with IOAG Catalog 2 
remains and it should be fixed somehow.
5) Page 67 you say <CCSDS has not really defined Network Control, per se, 
and we use the term "network management" to describe SSI functions.> Will 
you then change the title?
6) For Page 70 I do agree with your comment <This is a CCSDS document, not 
an IOAG document. CCSDS may define standards that IOAG has not yet signed 
up to use, and it may not have the resources to produce standards that 
IOAG wants.> and I never meant giving any kind of supremacy of IOAG wrt 
CCSDS :o)
However there a few point to be considered 
- IOAG Catalog 2 is referenced here as [20]. It is mentioned only once on 
page 66 but still people may get confused incongruences.
- IOAG Catalog 2 was somehow technically accepted by CCSDS as the set of 
services for SSI. Not having resources for a service it does mean that the 
service is technically wrong or irrelevant.
Having said this, I think that a Green Book offers space for text to 
clarify things.
With respect to the list of services I think therefore the list should be 
complete (with as many remarks as needed) or explicitly limited to CORE 
services.
Moreover if we identify more services in CCSDS as e.g.  the SSI position 
services, we should clarify this in the document and also have some 
internal CCSDS discussion.
7) Page 72 you say <There is not yet, to my knowledge, a plan to develop 
such a standard. If there is such a plan we can add it.>  Not planned 
indeed but studies around. My simple suggestion is to say e.g.  In the 
forward direction, nowadays the ESLT can only communicate with one of the 
spacecraft at a time........
The simple addition of the word nowadays (or similar) would leave open 
doors for evolution.
8) Page 75 you say <Add new section "- position service - provides 
information about the positions or relay and possibly user assets for 
planning purposes.>  OK with this addition. However I think that it should 
be remarked that this is a CCSDS addition wrt IOAG Catalog 2 and I still 
think we also have some internal CCSDS discussion about what we mean and 
the impact on CCSDS plans. Also consistency with SSI architecture Green 
Book should be checked/ensured as indeed the file "730x1g01_CESG_Approval" 
never uses the term "position".
9) For Figure 6-1 you say "There is a corresponding "Return" stack that is 
not shown here."
It would we worth adding some text to state this.
10) Page 36: About the discrepancy between  Figure 2-4 and SLE Reference 
Model/RAF, I leave any further comment to Margherita.

From:
Peter Shames <greybear125 at gmail.com>
To:
Erik Barkley <Erik.Barkley at jpl.nasa.gov>, Keith Scott <kscott at mitre.org>, 
Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>
Cc:
Peter Shames <greybear125 at gmail.com>, Takahiro Yamada 
<tyamada at pub.isas.jaxa.jp>, Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
Date:
04/07/2013 07:19
Subject:
RID responses for SCCS ADD GB, 901.0-G-0.1

[attachment "901x0g01_CESG_Approval_kls-ps.xlsx" deleted by Gian Paolo 
Calzolari/esoc/ESA] 
[attachment "901x0g01_CESG_Approval+gpc-ps.pdf" deleted by Gian Paolo 
Calzolari/esoc/ESA] 

Dear Colleagues,

I am winging my way across the Pacific, headed for two weeks of vacation. 
With nothing else to do I decided to get these SCCS ADD RIDs resolved.  I 
have done the following:

1) Marked up the PDF file that Gippo annotated with From/To changes, as 
requested by Tom
2) Indicated where there are changes to figures driven by requests (there 
are a few, sorry about that)
3) Inserted From/To changes to indicate exactly what I thought should be 
changed to accommodate Keith's RIDs
4) Added a Resolution column to Keith's spreadsheet where I indicated what 
I though we could accept and what I thought we did not need to deal with 
now
5) There is one open issue (Keith's RID 9) that I do not have an answer 
for.  If everyone agrees I propose we treat it exactly like Keith's RID 40 
and add another "phantom CCSDS reference" for CGR (assuming it is to be a 
CCSDS standard)

I sincerely hope that you find this proposal acceptable.  This is a Green 
Book and it deals with some amount of future-looking , speculative, stuff. 
 It will surely need another revision in 3-5 years when other issues may 
be dealt with.  And it provides something that is missing from CCSDS 
today, so I would like to get it out there.

Keith & Gippo:  Please review the marked up sections and see if you are 
willing to concur with the proposed resolutions for your RIDs

Erik & Takahiro: Please review the proposed changes and ensure that you do 
not have any issues with them

Assuming we get through that unscathed please send the resulting file to 
Tom with a resolution to publish.  If not we'll do a next round of 
negotiation.

Best regards, Peter

________________________________________________________

Peter Shames
greybear125 at gmail.com
Ph: 818-687-7901

________________________________________________________

?Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes 
a touch of genius --- and a lot of courage --- to move in the opposite 
direction.?

Albert Einstein

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only. The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its content is not permitted. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130708/0b81a8fb/attachment.htm