From Nestor.Peccia at esa.int Thu May 2 02:38:06 2013 From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int (Nestor.Peccia@esa.int) Date: Thu May 2 02:33:44 2013 Subject: [CESG] Fw: CESG Action Items from Bordeaux Message-ID: <25082_1367476685_518209CD_25082_19603_1_OFECD724E8.536DD9B6-ONC1257B5F.00242667-C1257B5F.00245B26@esa.int> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 754 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130502/2ec80aa4/attachment.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 9127 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130502/2ec80aa4/attachment-0001.jpe From mike.kearney at nasa.gov Tue May 7 18:45:06 2013 From: mike.kearney at nasa.gov (Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)) Date: Tue May 7 18:40:53 2013 Subject: [CESG] Fall meeting location - San Antonio Message-ID: <2AC93642F8D00342B8FE3F273143E124F9A26426C3@NDMSSCC08.ndc.nasa.gov> CMC and CESG members: NASA has replanned the fall meeting location to San Antonio, Texas. Our outstanding colleagues at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) have offered to host the meeting on their campus. The meeting remains on the same days, and will follow the 4-day template (with a CESG on Friday). The only disadvantage compared to some venues may be that we will be spread across several buildings, but we think the walking distance between meeting rooms will be less than the distance between rooms at CU-Boulder in 2011. And SwRI has offered to provide coffee/water, so that partially overcomes the persistent legal problems that NASA has in providing food. We will post logistics info (hotel, transportation, etc.) online shortly. An announcement to the CCSDS-All mail list will follow shortly. Here is a my Google Map of the SwRI location. https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=213120090428056025985.0004dc13c8a2d2a9d74a0&msa=0&ll=29.443484,-98.58839&spn=0.139025,0.317574 Best regards, -=- Mike Mike Kearney Lead Technology Manager Mission Operations Laboratory NASA MSFC EO-01 +1-256-544-2029 "Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be driven into practice with courageous impatience." - ADM Hyman G. Rickover -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130507/dd734121/attachment.html From Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int Wed May 8 09:07:38 2013 From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int (Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int) Date: Wed May 8 09:03:32 2013 Subject: [CESG] Space Link Services Area Resolution SLS-R-2013-05-001 - CCSDS 414.1-B Pseudo-Noise (PN) Ranging Systems Message-ID: <26963_1368018455_518A4E16_26963_9513_1_OF393533C2.766E4DB3-ONC1257B65.004743EE-C1257B65.00481C41@esa.int> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SLS-R-2013-05-001(414.1).v1.0.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 239873 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130508/6c0bc956/SLS-R-2013-05-001414.1.v1.0-0001.obj From tomg at aiaa.org Fri May 10 16:51:47 2013 From: tomg at aiaa.org (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Fri May 10 16:51:52 2013 Subject: [CESG] New CESG Poll Message-ID: Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//Microsoft Corporation//Outlook 14.0 MIMEDIR//EN VERSION:2.0 METHOD:PUBLISH X-MS-OLK-FORCEINSPECTOROPEN:TRUE BEGIN:VEVENT CATEGORIES:Orange Category CLASS:PUBLIC CREATED:20130510T205340Z DESCRIPTION:CESG-P-2013-05-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 508.0-B-1\, Conju nction Data Message (Blue Book\, Issue 1)\n DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20130525 DTSTAMP:20130510T205340Z DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20130524 LAST-MODIFIED:20130510T205340Z PRIORITY:5 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-us:CESG Poll Closure TRANSP:TRANSPARENT UID:040000008200E00074C5B7101A82E00800000000B0C5C2E29E4DCE01000000000000000 0100000004A15E1F5934F5D43A273F08FE97FE491 X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

CESG-P-2013-05-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 508.0-B-1\, \; Conjun ction Data Message (Blue Book\, Issue 1)< /SPAN>

\n\n\n X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:FREE X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1 X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE X-MS-OLK-CONFTYPE:0 BEGIN:VALARM TRIGGER:-PT1080M ACTION:DISPLAY DESCRIPTION:Reminder END:VALARM END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR From Nestor.Peccia at esa.int Mon May 13 08:37:02 2013 From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int (Nestor.Peccia@esa.int) Date: Mon May 13 08:34:03 2013 Subject: [CESG] CCSDS presentation to IOAG-17 (IOP-3 rehearsal) Message-ID: <4162_1368448625_5190DE70_4162_6638_1_OF1B7F559F.4CF1EA59-ONC1257B6A.004515EB-C1257B6A.00453594@esa.int> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IOP3-CCSDS Presentation- Issue 5.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 2117595 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130513/408b52dc/IOP3-CCSDSPresentation-Issue5-0001.obj From peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov Mon May 13 12:45:00 2013 From: peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov (Shames, Peter M (313B)) Date: Mon May 13 12:41:33 2013 Subject: [CESG] CCSDS presentation to IOAG-17 (IOP-3 rehearsal) In-Reply-To: <4162_1368448625_5190DE70_4162_6638_1_OF1B7F559F.4CF1EA59-ONC1257B6A.004515EB-C1257B6A.00453594@esa.int> Message-ID: Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IOP3-CCSDS Presentation- Issue 5-ps.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 2356128 bytes Desc: IOP3-CCSDS Presentation- Issue 5-ps.pdf Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130513/003c84cb/IOP3-CCSDSPresentation-Issue5-ps-0001.pdf From Nestor.Peccia at esa.int Tue May 14 02:04:47 2013 From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int (Nestor.Peccia@esa.int) Date: Tue May 14 02:00:43 2013 Subject: [CESG] CCSDS presentation to IOAG-17 (IOP-3 rehearsal) In-Reply-To: References: <4162_1368448625_5190DE70_4162_6638_1_OF1B7F559F.4CF1EA59-ONC1257B6A.004515EB-C1257B6A.00453594@esa.int> Message-ID: <30981_1368511487_5191D3FF_30981_7122_1_OF2E9E3D71.4060BF9C-ONC1257B6B.00201198-C1257B6B.00214C4F@esa.int> Peter I agree with your first comment, which is implicit in VG # 7 I disagree with your 2nd comment when referring to MO services. I believe the cross support issue has a CCSDS internal component (e..g take a look at the last year change of strategy and the books appearing / disappearing from the CWE). The problems in Cross Support are not only missing resources, but resources pumped in by Agencies in the last 5 or 6 years with scarce output (in particular SM). I have looked at ESA resources in the last 5 or 6 years for the CSS Area and we have spent between 400 and 500 K?. and we continue to support these activities. This needs a deeper discussion within the CESG for the production of the books CMC, because the CESG does not manage the Agencies level of resources ciao nestor 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/20130514/a43708ff/attachment.htm From Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int Fri May 17 04:32:11 2013 From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int (Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int) Date: Fri May 17 04:24:23 2013 Subject: Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book Message-ID: <29437_1368779528_5195EB08_29437_5061_1_OF64E377FB.2077ADA0-ONC1257B6E.002E2684-C1257B6E.002EE494@esa.int> Nestor, I got no comment on this subject and, as I think we should not loose the occasion to improve the procedure while Tom is working in this book, I kindly ask you to include this in the agenda for the CESG Webex Meeting on 1st July? Regards Gian Paolo ----- Forwarded by Gian Paolo Calzolari/esoc/ESA on 17/05/2013 10:24 ----- From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int To: "CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group" Date: 30/04/2013 17:10 Subject: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book Sent by: cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org Dear All, please find here attached some considerations about BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book. I generated these considerations taking into account that "originally" (i.e. just after CCSDS restructuring) there were no CWE Projects to take into account; i.e. the Charter were self contained with respect to the complete work to be done by the WG. I have the impression that this new situation is not fully reflected in CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 yet. Here below some text from CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 about BOFs activities together with some comments from me. 1) The charter states the scope of discussion for the WG , as well as its goals and deliverable products.> [GPC] OK this is one of the documents to be produced by a BOF for eventual CESG + CMC Approval with the remark that CESG does not focus on resources. 2) Figure 6-1: CCSDS Document Taxonomy [GPC] This figure requires a Concept Paper to start a Green Book (and not a White Paper). A White Book is a "CCSDS Proposed Draft Recommended Standard"; i.e. draft blue before becoming red. ===> Concept paper and White Book below to the document life cycle with the Concept Paper being the document needed to start a CWE Project (i.e. to accompany the poll for the creation of a CWE Project). This is also assuming the 1 to 1 correspondence between books and projects. 3) The work of the BOF is to articulate the technical concept, usually in the form of a brief white paper, draft a charter for the proposed WG , appoint someone who is able to be chair, and demonstrate that resources can be secured to do the work. [GPC] Reading this text it may look that a White Paper paper supports a Charter while a Concept paper supports a (project to write a) Book Would everybody agree? In general I have the impression there is an hole in the real procedures due to the fact that "originally" everything was done creating a WG and then the WG was going to create (internal, not CWE) projects. Now the approach we have taken is that CESG/CMC approve creating a WG together with the (first) project(s) in order to evaluate also resources; e.g. look at Telerobotic just as last case. Taking into account all I have said above, a BOF should provide a final package made of 4 items a) Draft charter for approval b) White paper supporting the draft charter c) One Draft CWE project for each proposed book d) One Concept paper for each proposed book supporting the related draft CWE project REMARKS: Actually c and d could be included as Annexes to the White paper. Moreover c should be limited to the books for which the work will start at WG Creation or shortly after to avoid approving projects planned to start 3 or 4 years after WG creation). Then d could keep the 1:1 relationship with c or (optionally) include also concept papers for future books (if available). Would everybody agree? In general, the difference between white paper and concept paper looks fuzzy in the current book.. Am I the only one puzzled about this? Would you share the need of some (little) editing to CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 in order to make all this clearer (and specially BOF output for CESG/CMC polls)? Best regards Gippo 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. _______________________________________________ CESG mailing list CESG@mailman.ccsds.org http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg 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/20130517/7996b481/attachment.html From Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int Fri May 17 04:37:04 2013 From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int (Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int) Date: Fri May 17 04:29:26 2013 Subject: [CESG] Space Link Services Area Resolution SLS-R-2013-05-002 Planetary Communications WG Message-ID: <21402_1368779823_5195EC2F_21402_15608_1_OF776DCE85.239C9AE9-ONC1257B6E.002CCE97-C1257B6E.002F56C2@esa.int> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SLS-R-2013-05-002(PCOM-WG).v1.0.rar Type: application/octet-stream Size: 491629 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130517/909c263d/SLS-R-2013-05-002PCOM-WG.v1.0-0001.obj From Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int Fri May 17 09:45:54 2013 From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int (Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int) Date: Fri May 17 09:38:27 2013 Subject: [CESG] Space Link Services Area Resolution SLS-R-2013-05-003 Recommendations 2.3.2 , 3.3.3A and Table 4.1.5-5b of CCSDS 401.0-B Message-ID: <11050_1368798351_5196348F_11050_340_1_OF250A333E.822A8863-ONC1257B6E.004AC070-C1257B6E.004B9DA6@esa.int> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SLS-R-2013-05-003(401.0-rec2.3.2+3.3.3A).v1.0.zip Type: application/zip Size: 411432 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130517/02a55b82/SLS-R-2013-05-003401.0-rec2.3.23.3.3A.v1.0-0001.zip From tomg at aiaa.org Mon May 20 06:00:00 2013 From: tomg at aiaa.org (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Mon May 20 07:24:40 2013 Subject: [CESG] CESG Poll Closure Reminder Message-ID: <8455be33-25a0-49fe-8b7c-14bc9ffaccec@AIAASWMLEXCH010.hq.ad.aiaa.org> Dear CESG Members, The closure date for the following poll is 24 May 2013: - CESG-P-2013-05-001 Approval to publish CCSDS 508.0-B-1, Conjunction Data Message (Blue Book, Issue 1) This poll can be accessed via the following link: http://public.ccsds.org/sites/cwe/cesg/Polls/default.aspx From Nestor.Peccia at esa.int Mon May 20 21:29:16 2013 From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int (Nestor.Peccia@esa.int) Date: Mon May 20 21:21:36 2013 Subject: Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book In-Reply-To: <29437_1368779528_5195EB08_29437_5061_1_OF64E377FB.2077ADA0-ONC1257B6E.002E2684-C1257B6E.002EE494@esa.int> References: <29437_1368779528_5195EB08_29437_5061_1_OF64E377FB.2077ADA0-ONC1257B6E.002E2684-C1257B6E.002EE494@esa.int> Message-ID: <1828_1369099758_519ACDEE_1828_6279_1_OFF77A3718.2887B389-ONC1257B72.0008233F-C1257B72.000811C6@esa.int> Gippo I will add the item to the agenda ciao nestor 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/20130521/a0501212/attachment.html From mike.kearney at nasa.gov Mon May 20 23:24:59 2013 From: mike.kearney at nasa.gov (Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)) Date: Mon May 20 23:21:59 2013 Subject: [Secretariat] Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book In-Reply-To: <29437_1368779528_5195EB08_29437_5061_1_OF64E377FB.2077ADA0-ONC1257B6E.002E2684-C1257B6E.002EE494@esa.int> References: <29437_1368779528_5195EB08_29437_5061_1_OF64E377FB.2077ADA0-ONC1257B6E.002E2684-C1257B6E.002EE494@esa.int> Message-ID: <2AC93642F8D00342B8FE3F273143E124F9A281F9F6@NDMSSCC08.ndc.nasa.gov> I will contribute what I remember from my discussions with Adrian when I was a new guy. White paper = White book; the two are interchangeable. A white book is a draft recommendation (standard or practice). A concept paper is what a BOF does in order to prove why it needs to become a working group. A BOF is not supposed to do "real" work before it is approved as a WG at which time it is allowed to commence working on a white book. Therefore the concept paper should be something interesting, but following the rule above, it should not be a draft white book. However, in practice this is difficult... a concept paper will often look like a draft white book. Therefore it is hard to enforce the rule that a BOF should not produce a white book. Personally, I think that requiring a concept paper to *not* look like a draft white book is not only unenforceable, it is not always the most efficient approach. In some cases it may be best to let the concept paper look like a draft white book, if that is what is needed to communicate to the CMC what the scope of the proposed work is. I think we can let the BOF (or the CESG?) decide. In any case I would recommend not having a hard and fast rule splitting definitions of a concept paper from a white book. But that is a CESG decision to make. -=- Mike Mike Kearney Lead Technology Manager Mission Operations Laboratory NASA MSFC EO-01 +1-256-544-2029 "Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be driven into practice with courageous impatience." - ADM Hyman G. Rickover From: secretariat-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:secretariat-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 3:32 AM To: CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group Subject: [Secretariat] Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book Nestor, I got no comment on this subject and, as I think we should not loose the occasion to improve the procedure while Tom is working in this book, I kindly ask you to include this in the agenda for the CESG Webex Meeting on 1st July? Regards Gian Paolo ----- Forwarded by Gian Paolo Calzolari/esoc/ESA on 17/05/2013 10:24 ----- From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int To: "CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group" Date: 30/04/2013 17:10 Subject: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book Sent by: cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org ________________________________ Dear All, please find here attached some considerations about BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book. I generated these considerations taking into account that "originally" (i.e. just after CCSDS restructuring) there were no CWE Projects to take into account; i.e. the Charter were self contained with respect to the complete work to be done by the WG. I have the impression that this new situation is not fully reflected in CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 yet. Here below some text from CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 about BOFs activities together with some comments from me. 1) The charter states the scope of discussion for the WG , as well as its goals and deliverable products.> [GPC] OK this is one of the documents to be produced by a BOF for eventual CESG + CMC Approval with the remark that CESG does not focus on resources. 2) Figure 6-1: CCSDS Document Taxonomy [GPC] This figure requires a Concept Paper to start a Green Book (and not a White Paper). A White Book is a "CCSDS Proposed Draft Recommended Standard"; i.e. draft blue before becoming red. ===> Concept paper and White Book below to the document life cycle with the Concept Paper being the document needed to start a CWE Project (i.e. to accompany the poll for the creation of a CWE Project). This is also assuming the 1 to 1 correspondence between books and projects. 3) The work of the BOF is to articulate the technical concept, usually in the form of a brief white paper, draft a charter for the proposed WG , appoint someone who is able to be chair, and demonstrate that resources can be secured to do the work. [GPC] Reading this text it may look that a White Paper paper supports a Charter while a Concept paper supports a (project to write a) Book Would everybody agree? In general I have the impression there is an hole in the real procedures due to the fact that "originally" everything was done creating a WG and then the WG was going to create (internal, not CWE) projects. Now the approach we have taken is that CESG/CMC approve creating a WG together with the (first) project(s) in order to evaluate also resources; e.g. look at Telerobotic just as last case. Taking into account all I have said above, a BOF should provide a final package made of 4 items a) Draft charter for approval b) White paper supporting the draft charter c) One Draft CWE project for each proposed book d) One Concept paper for each proposed book supporting the related draft CWE project REMARKS: Actually c and d could be included as Annexes to the White paper. Moreover c should be limited to the books for which the work will start at WG Creation or shortly after to avoid approving projects planned to start 3 or 4 years after WG creation). Then d could keep the 1:1 relationship with c or (optionally) include also concept papers for future books (if available). Would everybody agree? In general, the difference between white paper and concept paper looks fuzzy in the current book.. Am I the only one puzzled about this? Would you share the need of some (little) editing to CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 in order to make all this clearer (and specially BOF output for CESG/CMC polls)? Best regards Gippo 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. _______________________________________________ CESG mailing list CESG@mailman.ccsds.org http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg 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/20130520/8d3e706f/attachment.html From peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov Tue May 21 09:16:04 2013 From: peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov (Shames, Peter M (313B)) Date: Tue May 21 09:08:41 2013 Subject: [Secretariat] Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book In-Reply-To: <2AC93642F8D00342B8FE3F273143E124F9A281F9F6@NDMSSCC08.ndc.nasa.gov> Message-ID: Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CCSDS Org & Process Manual A02x1y3.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 578280 bytes Desc: CCSDS Org & Process Manual A02x1y3.pdf Url : http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20130521/6c140dae/CCSDSOrgProcessManualA02x1y3-0001.pdf From Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int Tue May 21 13:01:39 2013 From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int (Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int) Date: Tue May 21 12:54:02 2013 Subject: [Secretariat] Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book In-Reply-To: References: <2AC93642F8D00342B8FE3F273143E124F9A281F9F6@NDMSSCC08.ndc.nasa.gov> Message-ID: <32246_1369155692_519BA86C_32246_18724_1_OF1FDE9C03.8DD78494-ONC1257B72.005998F4-C1257B72.005D8910@esa.int> I do agree with Peter on the fact that we do NOT " need to invent anything new". I am not so sure that "these terms and processes are already well defined" as Peter says and for this reason I would like to see some polishing. For sure I fink that the following equivalences are false: 1) white paper = concept paper (from Peter) 2) White paper = White book; the two are interchangeable. (from Mike) What I remarked is that they are even more false after we dismissed the original idea of having 1 WG = 1 Book. It is a matter of fact that today we have agreed to have a multiple correspondence between WG and books (i.e. 1 WG has several CWE Project, with 1 Project = 1 Book either new or to update). I think this approach is not well reflected in the CCSDS procedures. Having said this it is true that, digging through the CCSDS Procs doc, the following can be found: a) a white paper, or concept paper, is the initial noodling of a BoF on the way to a working group b) a white book is is a "CCSDS Proposed Draft Recommended Standard"; i.e. draft blue/magenta before becoming red (as per Figure 6-1: CCSDS Document Taxonomy); i.e. it exist after WG Creation and CWE Project approval c) a concept paper is needed to start any CCSDS Book (*) (as per Figure 6-1: CCSDS Document Taxonomy); i.e. it exist before CWE Project approval (this may be before or after WG Creation). (*) and not only a Green Book as I erroneously wrote in my first mail I also have the following consideration: White Paper It should contain all BOF's considerations that do not go into the CWE Charter/Project(s). It may even include items from CWE Charter/Project(s) for a more comfortable reading/presentation (e.g. a global schedule for more books will be better explained in the White Paper than going to look and combine the individual CWE Projects, etc.). I doubt that a WG would update a White Paper after WG creation, but this is just an opinion and it cannot be excluded. Fine about free format with one caveat: as the White Paper explains why CESG and CMC should approve the WG creation, the format should allow CESG and CMC to make up their mind about the eventual vote. White Book White Books exist within a WG (and not within a BOF) and - as Peter says - they remain White Books i.e. it exist after WG Creation and CWE Project approval Concept Paper Every CCSDS document (or family of related documents) starts out as a CCSDS concept paper; i.e. a Concept Paper explains what a book (or several books) will contain and it is not expected to be a draft of the eventual book. A Concept Paper may be prepared by a BOF when defining the initial target of a WG or it may be prepared by a WG is new books/projects are added while the WG is already alive. For the BOF case, I think that the Concept paper could be integrated in the White Paper. As the 3 terms are already in the CCSDS Procedures, I am just asking to make their definition clearer and - most important - to adapt this yellow book to the approach we have nowadays with CWE Charters and Project. Just to confuse a bit more the debate, I would mention that in 2.3.3.4 of the Organisation and Processes, it is said that: "A WG chair is specifically responsible for a) creating a charter, work plan, and resource plan for the WG and getting it approved by the Area Director and the CESG; b) publishing the approved work plan, showing the scope of its tasks, their schedule, and the nature and source of the resources (e.g., which agencies are providing staffing support) that are needed for their completion; c) making sure that necessary resources are committed by someone during the initiation and conduct of new work or the modification of work in progress;" COMMENTS: - Items a) and b) are indeed part of the work to cerate a WG; i.e. they shall be done within the BOF - Item a) should include CMC approval - Items a) and b) are generating tasks for the WG chair with respect to their maintenance for addition, deletions, completion, etc.; i.e. WG task should include their maintenance (including additions) and not their creation. - Item b) is actually done through CWE Projects and not via a separate document (and CWE Charters and Projects are subject to CMC Approval) - In principle, item c) is NEVER a task of the WG Chair but rather a task of CMC members :o) Best regards Gian Paolo From: "Shames, Peter M (313B)" To: "Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)" , "Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int" , "CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group" Date: 21/05/2013 15:16 Subject: Re: [Secretariat] Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book According to the CCSDS Procs doc (attached) a white paper, or concept paper, is the initial noodlings of a BoF on the way to a working group (sec 2.3.4 Sec 6). That White Paper may get refined even after the WG is formed. It is often the case that a white paper contains material that is both "green" and "blue" in nature. There is no constraint placed on the format of a White Paper, it could be in some arbitrary tech memo form or formatted to look like a White Book. The format does not matter since it has no formal standing. Once a WG settles on what just what standards they need to develop, how many, of what "color" this White Paper material may get split out into more than one book (sec 6). Those draft Green and Blue (or Magenta) books are White Books (Sec B2.2). They remain White Books until the WG completes their work and hands them off to the tech editor. They become Red Books when the tech editor send them out for review. I do not think we need to invent anything new, I think that these terms and processes are already well defined. Peter From: , Mike Kearney Date: Monday, May 20, 2013 8:24 PM To: Gian Paolo Calzolari , CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec Subject: RE: [Secretariat] Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book I will contribute what I remember from my discussions with Adrian when I was a new guy. White paper = White book; the two are interchangeable. A white book is a draft recommendation (standard or practice). A concept paper is what a BOF does in order to prove why it needs to become a working group. A BOF is not supposed to do ?real? work before it is approved as a WG at which time it is allowed to commence working on a white book. Therefore the concept paper should be something interesting, but following the rule above, it should not be a draft white book. However, in practice this is difficult? a concept paper will often look like a draft white book. Therefore it is hard to enforce the rule that a BOF should not produce a white book. Personally, I think that requiring a concept paper to *not* look like a draft white book is not only unenforceable, it is not always the most efficient approach. In some cases it may be best to let the concept paper look like a draft white book, if that is what is needed to communicate to the CMC what the scope of the proposed work is. I think we can let the BOF (or the CESG?) decide. In any case I would recommend not having a hard and fast rule splitting definitions of a concept paper from a white book. But that is a CESG decision to make. -=- Mike Mike Kearney Lead Technology Manager Mission Operations Laboratory NASA MSFC EO-01 +1-256-544-2029 "Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be driven into practice with courageous impatience." - ADM Hyman G. Rickover From: secretariat-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org [ mailto:secretariat-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 3:32 AM To: CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group Subject: [Secretariat] Fw: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book Nestor, I got no comment on this subject and, as I think we should not loose the occasion to improve the procedure while Tom is working in this book, I kindly ask you to include this in the agenda for the CESG Webex Meeting on 1st July? Regards Gian Paolo ----- Forwarded by Gian Paolo Calzolari/esoc/ESA on 17/05/2013 10:24 ----- From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari@esa.int To: "CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group" Date: 30/04/2013 17:10 Subject: [CESG] BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book Sent by: cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org Dear All, please find here attached some considerations about BOFs and White Paper vs. Concept Paper vs. White Book. I generated these considerations taking into account that "originally" (i.e. just after CCSDS restructuring) there were no CWE Projects to take into account; i.e. the Charter were self contained with respect to the complete work to be done by the WG. I have the impression that this new situation is not fully reflected in CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 yet. Here below some text from CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 about BOFs activities together with some comments from me. 1) The charter states the scope of discussion for the WG , as well as its goals and deliverable products.> [GPC] OK this is one of the documents to be produced by a BOF for eventual CESG + CMC Approval with the remark that CESG does not focus on resources. 2) Figure 6-1: CCSDS Document Taxonomy [GPC] This figure requires a Concept Paper to start a Green Book (and not a White Paper). A White Book is a "CCSDS Proposed Draft Recommended Standard"; i.e. draft blue before becoming red. ===> Concept paper and White Book below to the document life cycle with the Concept Paper being the document needed to start a CWE Project (i.e. to accompany the poll for the creation of a CWE Project). This is also assuming the 1 to 1 correspondence between books and projects. 3) The work of the BOF is to articulate the technical concept, usually in the form of a brief white paper, draft a charter for the proposed WG , appoint someone who is able to be chair, and demonstrate that resources can be secured to do the work. [GPC] Reading this text it may look that a White Paper paper supports a Charter while a Concept paper supports a (project to write a) Book Would everybody agree? In general I have the impression there is an hole in the real procedures due to the fact that "originally" everything was done creating a WG and then the WG was going to create (internal, not CWE) projects. Now the approach we have taken is that CESG/CMC approve creating a WG together with the (first) project(s) in order to evaluate also resources; e.g. look at Telerobotic just as last case. Taking into account all I have said above, a BOF should provide a final package made of 4 items a) Draft charter for approval b) White paper supporting the draft charter c) One Draft CWE project for each proposed book d) One Concept paper for each proposed book supporting the related draft CWE project REMARKS: Actually c and d could be included as Annexes to the White paper. Moreover c should be limited to the books for which the work will start at WG Creation or shortly after to avoid approving projects planned to start 3 or 4 years after WG creation). Then d could keep the 1:1 relationship with c or (optionally) include also concept papers for future books (if available). Would everybody agree? In general, the difference between white paper and concept paper looks fuzzy in the current book.. Am I the only one puzzled about this? Would you share the need of some (little) editing to CCSDS A02.1-Y-3 in order to make all this clearer (and specially BOF output for CESG/CMC polls)? Best regards Gippo 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. _______________________________________________ CESG mailing list CESG@mailman.ccsds.org http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg 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.[attachment "CCSDS Org & Process Manual A02x1y3.pdf" deleted by Gian Paolo Calzolari/esoc/ESA] 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/20130521/9d3bb18d/attachment-0001.html From thomas.gannett at tgannett.net Sun May 26 18:19:03 2013 From: thomas.gannett at tgannett.net (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Sun May 26 18:17:07 2013 Subject: [CESG] New CESG Poll Message-ID: <51a28bab.c505310a.2d83.4f1c@mx.google.com> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//Microsoft Corporation//Outlook 14.0 MIMEDIR//EN VERSION:2.0 METHOD:PUBLISH X-MS-OLK-FORCEINSPECTOROPEN:TRUE BEGIN:VEVENT CATEGORIES:Orange Category CLASS:PUBLIC CREATED:20130526T220751Z DESCRIPTION:- CESG-P-2013-05-002 Approval to release CCSDS 414.1-P-1\, Pse udo-Noise (PN) Ranging Systems (Pink Sheets\, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency re view\n- CESG-P-2013-05-003 Approval to release CCSDS 401.0-P-22.1\, Radio Frequency and Modulation Systems???Part 1: Earth Stations and Spacecraft (Pink Sheets\, Issue 22.1) for CCSDS Agency review\n- CESG-P-2013-05-004 A pproval to publish CCSDS 506.1-B-1\, Delta-DOR Raw Data Exchange Format ( Blue Book\, Issue 1)\n DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20130611 DTSTAMP:20130526T220751Z DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20130610 LAST-MODIFIED:20130526T220751Z PRIORITY:5 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-us:CESG Poll Closure TRANSP:TRANSPARENT UID:040000008200E00074C5B7101A82E00800000000E073E0E73B5ACE01000000000000000 0100000003CEB34A3FEE05841A5520051667DD830 X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

- \; \;  \; \; \; \; CESG-P-2013-05-002 Approval to release CCSDS 414.1-P-1\, \; Pseudo-N oise (PN) Ranging Systems (Pink Sheets\, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review< /FONT>

\n\n

- \; \; \; \; \; \; CESG-P-2013-05-003 Approva l to release CCSDS 401.0-P-22.1\, \; Radio Frequency and Modulation Sy stems???Part 1: Earth Stations and Spacecraft (Pink Sheets\, Issue 22.1) f or CCSDS Agency review

\n\n

- \; \; \;  \; \; \; CES G-P-2013-05-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 506.1-B-1\, \; Delta-DOR Raw Data Exchange Format (Blue Book\, Issue 1)

\n\n\n X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:FREE X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1 X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE X-MS-OLK-CONFTYPE:0 BEGIN:VALARM TRIGGER:-PT1080M ACTION:DISPLAY DESCRIPTION:Reminder END:VALARM END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR From tomg at aiaa.org Sun May 26 18:13:36 2013 From: tomg at aiaa.org (CCSDS Secretariat) Date: Sun May 26 18:20:53 2013 Subject: [CESG] New CESG Poll Message-ID: <152916bd-2e90-466c-8bfc-eab42f03409f@AIAASWMLEXCH010.hq.ad.aiaa.org> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//Microsoft Corporation//Outlook 14.0 MIMEDIR//EN VERSION:2.0 METHOD:PUBLISH X-MS-OLK-FORCEINSPECTOROPEN:TRUE BEGIN:VEVENT CATEGORIES:Orange Category CLASS:PUBLIC CREATED:20130526T220751Z DESCRIPTION:- CESG-P-2013-05-002 Approval to release CCSDS 414.1-P-1\, Pse udo-Noise (PN) Ranging Systems (Pink Sheets\, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency re view\n- CESG-P-2013-05-003 Approval to release CCSDS 401.0-P-22.1\, Radio Frequency and Modulation Systems???Part 1: Earth Stations and Spacecraft (Pink Sheets\, Issue 22.1) for CCSDS Agency review\n- CESG-P-2013-05-004 A pproval to publish CCSDS 506.1-B-1\, Delta-DOR Raw Data Exchange Format ( Blue Book\, Issue 1)\n DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20130611 DTSTAMP:20130526T220751Z DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20130610 LAST-MODIFIED:20130526T220751Z PRIORITY:5 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-us:CESG Poll Closure TRANSP:TRANSPARENT UID:040000008200E00074C5B7101A82E00800000000E073E0E73B5ACE01000000000000000 0100000003CEB34A3FEE05841A5520051667DD830 X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

- \; \;  \; \; \; \; CESG-P-2013-05-002 Approval to release CCSDS 414.1-P-1\, \; Pseudo-N oise (PN) Ranging Systems (Pink Sheets\, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review< /FONT>

\n\n

- \; \; \; \; \; \; CESG-P-2013-05-003 Approva l to release CCSDS 401.0-P-22.1\, \; Radio Frequency and Modulation Sy stems???Part 1: Earth Stations and Spacecraft (Pink Sheets\, Issue 22.1) f or CCSDS Agency review

\n\n

- \; \; \;  \; \; \; CES G-P-2013-05-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 506.1-B-1\, \; Delta-DOR Raw Data Exchange Format (Blue Book\, Issue 1)

\n\n\n X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:FREE X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1 X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE X-MS-OLK-CONFTYPE:0 BEGIN:VALARM TRIGGER:-PT1080M ACTION:DISPLAY DESCRIPTION:Reminder END:VALARM END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR