[CESG] Draft of revised Org & Proc Concept paper section / lifetime of only nine months? etc

Shames, Peter M (312G) peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov
Tue Nov 5 17:03:49 EST 2013

Hi Gippo,

Most of what you are pointing at has been in this document for quite a number of years now.  I suggest, in the same manner as Pink Sheet reviews, that we limit our comments and analysis to just those sections that are proposed for change.  If we are really going to do an extensive revision of this document we can deal with anything else then.

Also, I would point out that all of the specific cases you mentioned for "announcement of availability" are already covered by "interested parties", without getting into specifics.  Those specifics, by themselves, may be too limiting.

The file that recommends changes to the A20x1 text specifically deals with the proposed contents of the Concept Paper.  You did not mention this, which was the purpose of this "Pink Sheet" revision, so I assume by your silence on this matter that you agree with what was proposed.  Is that the case?

Tom will have to address any disconnects between what is documented in A02x1 and the actual processes that are carried out re assignment of numbers .

Regards, Peter

From: Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int<mailto:Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>>
Date: Tuesday, November 5, 2013 12:00 PM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Cc: Tom Gannett <tomg at aiaa.org<mailto:tomg at aiaa.org>>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>, Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int<mailto:Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>>
Subject: Re: [CESG] Draft of revised Org & Proc Concept paper section / lifetime of only nine months? etc

Peter (but not only :o),
        Do we really need <lifetime of only nine months>?

Moreover, was this <The Secretariat will then assign the concept paper a reference number and a date of expiration> ever done?

<will announce its availability to one or more mailing lists of interested parties>
who are the interested parties?
I think they could be CESG and affected WGs.
For WGs we may have the originator WG (that would know about it) or the WG that shall do the work (if the paper comes from external source) or the WGs impacted by the work even if this is done in another WG.
All in all, would it be simpler to limit distribution to CESG mailing list or better to CESG-all?

<All that is necessary is to observe some basic formatting rules that are established by the Secretariat in the CCSDS Publications Manual>
The word "concept" is not found in that manual.....

More comments may follow if I find more than two minutes to dedicate to your input  :o)



From:   "Shames, Peter M (312G)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
To:     CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Cc:     Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net<mailto:thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>>
Date:   03/11/2013 01:09
Subject:        [CESG] Draft of revised Org & Proc Concept paper section
Sent by:        cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>


Dear CESG Colleagues,

Attached is a draft of the proposed revisions to CCSDS Org & Proc concept paper section, Annex B1.  This update is to be inserted along with a reference to Annex B1 in Sections 2.3.4 and 6.1.1.  This file contains the original text of Section B1, with the proposed changes shown using Track Changes so that you can see what has been modified.  The primary changes consist of the following:
1.        Clarification of there being two general types of concept papers, one for WG formation and the second for specific documents or topics
2.        Addition of a bulletized list of topics common to both types
3.        Addition of an added bulletized list of topics specifically for BoF Concept Papers
I will note that Gippo and Gilles should recognize some of their own words in these two sets of topics, since they are derived, in part, from their inputs to the Org & Procs doc and from their requests for specific topics to be addressed in the Next Generation Space Link Protocol concept paper.   I believe, as revised, that these are suitable for use in all potential future standards and WG concept papers.

Your feedback is solicited.

Best regards, Peter

[attachment "CCSDS A02x1-Y-3x1 Annex B1 CCSDS CONCEPT PAPER.docx" deleted by Gian Paolo Calzolari/esoc/ESA] _______________________________________________
CESG mailing list
CESG at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:CESG at mailman.ccsds.org>

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/20131105/bb6f822e/attachment.html

More information about the CESG mailing list