[CESG] RE: Results of CESG Poll CESG-P-2015-03-006 Approval to release CCSDS 881.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-RFID Tag Encoding Specification (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review

Wed May 6 17:44:22 UTC 2015

I suspect that by the time you're done, the PICS will somewhere want to say something like "includes all the fields in table 3-1 in the specified order" but Section 4 is good enough for me to let the document go to CMC poll to release for agency review.

                        --keith

From: Kevin K Gifford [mailto:kevin.gifford at Colorado.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 1:16 PM
To: peter.shames at jpl.nasa.gov; Erik.Barkley at jpl.nasa.gov; Scott, Keith L.
Cc: Fink, Patrick W. (JSC-EV811); Barton, Richard J. (JSC-EV811); Thomas Gannett; Yuriy Sheynin
Subject: Re: Results of CESG Poll CESG-P-2015-03-006 Approval to release CCSDS 881.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-RFID Tag Encoding Specification (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review

Dear Peter, Erik, Keith -

Thank you for your time and expertise in providing the review of the SOIS Wireless WG RFID Tag-Encoding Red Book.

Attached please find two documents detailing the WWG's responses and associated updates.  The WWG concurred with all of the specific comments.  The attached spreadsheet lists the reviewer's (your) critique and lists the WWG action to address the RID along with indicating the specific document pages updated in the second attachment which is a clean version of the document with all identified Review Items dispositioned.

Please let me know if the changes meet with your approval or if you have any remaining outstanding issues that need to be addressed.

Thanks again for your time in reviewing the SOIS Wireless WG RFID Tag-Encoding Red Book.

Kevin

From: Thomas Gannett <tomg at aiaa.org<mailto:tomg at aiaa.org>>
Date: Thursday, April 16, 2015 11:31 AM
To: Kevin Gifford <gifford at rintintin.colorado.edu<mailto:gifford at rintintin.colorado.edu>>
Cc: "Fink, Patrick W. (JSC-EV811)" <patrick.w.fink at nasa.gov<mailto:patrick.w.fink at nasa.gov>>, "Barton, Richard J. (JSC-EV811)" <richard.j.barton at nasa.gov<mailto:richard.j.barton at nasa.gov>>, "Jean-Francois.Dufour at esa.int<mailto:Jean-Francois.Dufour at esa.int>" <Jean-Francois.Dufour at esa.int<mailto:Jean-Francois.Dufour at esa.int>>, "peter.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>" <peter.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>, "Erik.Barkley at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Erik.Barkley at jpl.nasa.gov>" <Erik.Barkley at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Erik.Barkley at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Subject: Results of CESG Poll CESG-P-2015-03-006 Approval to release CCSDS 881.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-RFID Tag Encoding Specification (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review

Dear Kevin et al.:

The CESG poll to approve release of the SOIS RFID Tag Red Book concluded with conditions. The conditions are stated below--I have attached the SEA AD's mark-up (881x1r0_CESG_Approval-SEA.pdf).

I have also attached the Word file (881x1r0_CESG_Approval.doc) used to create the PDF file used in the poll. Please use it to make changes in response to conditions.

Resolution of the conditions should be negotiated directly with the authors of the conditions (CCed) and reported back to the CESG.

Best regards,
Tom

CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2015-03-006 Approval to release CCSDS 881.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-RFID Tag Encoding Specification (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review
Results of CESG poll beginning 29 March 2015 and ending 15 April 2015:

                 Abstain:  3 (37.5%) (Merri, Behal, Calzolari)
 Approve Unconditionally:  3 (37.5%) (Suess, Barton, Scott)
 Approve with Conditions:  2 (25%) (Shames, Barkley)
 Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This document still needs some work, particularly in the areas relating to the use of SANA and the guidance to the SANA operator.

The data structure is also probably more awkward than it needs to be, but that appears to be a legacy limitation.

please see the attached mark-up.

Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions): Condition 1: For this type of recommendation an ICS should be stated to help ensure a good agency review -- it will be useful to know what is mandatory and what is optional in the ID (probably all of it but there is no direct statement of that)

Condition 2: it will be very helpful for agency reviews to know what the policy is for assigning database IDs in SANA -- note that claiming the SANA Registry as the administrator is insufficient as current CCSDS practice is that the recommendation that defines a registry must, necessarily, identify its management policy.

Keith Scott (Approve Unconditionally): I'm willing to let this go through to Agency Review, but the 'To Be Supplied' sections in the document (PICS, Patent Considerations) are questionable. I think the CESG should discuss whether such (admittedly slightly) incomplete documents should be put out for Agency Review.

Total Respondents: 8
No response was received from the following Area(s):

SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed

Thomas Gannett
+1 443 472 0805
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20150506/72d38dd4/attachment.html>