[CESG] Revised updates to CCSDS Org & Proc doc, A02.1-Y-4c1
Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int
Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int
Fri Sep 25 14:57:29 UTC 2015
All,
here is a couple of comments.
I would remove "and contributors" from the proposed change to 2.3.2.4.3
Area Director Responsibilities - item c)
The request of contributions is made in the BOF (otherwise there would be
no recommendation to go for WG) and nthing prevent an Agency from adding
resources.
Strange enough the list of "Area Director Responsibilities" seems to miss
what is stated under 2.3.3.4 first line.
I suggest completing "2.3.2.4.3 Area Director Responsibilities - item c)"
to state somehow that - after candidates are proposed - the AD nominates
the Chair(s) asking CESG approval.
The proposed change to section 2.3.4 does not reflect that we agreed that
a BOF is expected to ask agency representatives for initial chair
candidates to be reported to the AD within the concept paper (or within
the resource profile?) together with draft charter, draft project(s),
etc.
Moreover it looks as the AD can only "recommend more BOF work on the
charter and resource profile" and not on other items of the list following
a few lines below.
A possible rewording could something like this (better wording welcome
:o):
At such time as a BOF feels that it has enough agreement to propose
formation of a WG, it must schedule a meeting with an AD to present its
case providing a BOF Package including:
- a draft charter including candidate chairs (if identified by the BOF),
- at least one project definition (see 5.5.1.1.1),
- a resource profile for each project identifying expected efforts and
contributing agencies, and
- a CCSDS concept paper (see 6.1.3) outlining its technical scope.
The AD makes the initial determination as to whether to advocate the work
further, to recommend more BOF work on the BOF Package, or to reject the
proposal. If the AD recommends acceptance of the proposal, the AD must
then ask the CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or Deputy and for adequate
resources to support the work. Once a proposed WG chair (and possibly
deputy Chair) have been identified the AD must forward the BOF Package to
the CESG for a decision. If the AD rejects the proposal, the BOF can
appeal to the CESG chairman for a wider hearing, or it can simply
dissolve. BOFs initiated from inside the CCSDS organization have a
lifetime of no more than one year.
I invented the term BOF Package to make clear what I mean, but better
wording is surely possible and welcome.
BTW for this clause
6.1.3.3.4 If a BOF has to modify and resubmit its charter to meet any
changes as a result of CESG review, the concept paper shall be updated as
necessary and resubmitted as well.
I think that "its charter" is wrong as it is the charter of the proposed
WG and not the BOF charter.
I wish you all a nice week end.
Gippo
From: "Shames, Peter M (312B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
To: "CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec"
<cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>,
Date: 25/09/2015 01:45
Subject: [CESG] Revised updates to CCSDS Org & Proc doc,
A02.1-Y-4c1
Sent by: cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org
Dear CESG colleagues,
During today?s CESG telecon we discussed one set of proposed changes to
the CCSDS Organization and Procedures Yellow Book (CCSDS A02.1-Y-4)
addressing soliciting WG chair nominations from agencies. We did not
address at all the conflict of scheduling or interest issues that have
also been raised in recent discussions.
Please see the following proposed changes to the document. This set
covers only the specific topic we discussed today. Proposed changes from
the existing text are indicated in red. The proposed change to deal with
other topics are in green.
Best regards, Peter
==========================================================================
2.3.1.2 CMC Responsibilities (pg 2-5)
g) providing the overall administration of the organization, including
nominating and appointing CCSDS leadership (CESG & AD), and the very
important function of the Secretariat;
2.3.2.3 CESG Responsibilities (pg 2-11)
n) approving WG Chairs and Deputy Chairs;
NOTE ? For fairness and to help achieve agency balance the AD proposing
the Chair is to ask the CMC and the member agencies for nominees for new
WG Chair or Deputy prior to requesting the CESG ballot for the WG.
NOTE ? BOF and SIG chairs are not subject to CESG approval.
2.3.2.4.3 Area Director Responsibilities
c) making recommendations to the CESG concerning approval for the
chartering and formation of WGs; requesting nominations of qualified WG
chair candidates and contributors from the CMC prior to polling the CESG
for WG approval; replacing WG chairs who are no longer able to serve;
2.3.3.4 Working Group Chairs (pg 2-16)
Working Group chairs are nominated by an Area Director and approved by the
CESG. Candidates for selection as WG chairs must be recognized as a
leading technical expert in the field covered by that WG. Candidates may
come from any organization (including industry) and do not have to be
employees of space agencies. For fairness and to help achieve agency
balance the AD is required to ask the CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or
Deputy prior to requesting the CESG ballot for the WG. If a Working
Group chair can no longer serve the AD must follow the same process in
identifying a replacement. As a general principle, to avoid conflicts of
scheduling or interest, a single person may only be the Chair or Deputy of
one WG at a time.
2.3.4 BIRDS-OF-A-FEATHER GROUPS (pg 2-18, last paragraph)
?
At such time as a BOF feels that it has enough agreement to propose
formation of a WG, it must schedule a meeting with an AD to present its
case. The AD makes the initial determination as to whether to advocate the
work further, to recommend more BOF work on the charter and resource
profile, or to reject the proposal. If the AD recommends acceptance of the
proposal, the AD must then ask the CMC for nominees for new WG Chair or
Deputy and for adequate resources to support the work. Once a proposed WG
chair (and possibly deputy Chair) have been identified the AD must forward
the draft charter, project definition, and resource profile, accompanied
by a CCSDS concept paper (see 6.1.3) outlining its technical scope, is
forwarded to the CESG for a decision. If the AD rejects the proposal, the
BOF can appeal to the CESG chairman for a wider hearing, or it can simply
dissolve. BOFs initiated from inside the CCSDS organization have a
lifetime of no more than one year.
_______________________________________________
CESG mailing list
CESG at 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/20150925/e3d77606/attachment.html>
More information about the CESG
mailing list