[CESG] CESG / SEA Analysis of issues with IOAG RF Asset registry

[Shames, Peter M (312B)]

Ciao Nestor,

As requested during the CESG telecon, here is my analysis of the issues present in the current IOAG RF Assets registry.  The first, of course, is that access is limited.  Presumably we can fix that by creating a list of allowed access that includes the necessary people.

The primary use for this in CCSDS is intended to be to provide a list of RF assets that can be used in the future as part of planning and scheduling space communications.  As such this is of primary interest to the Cross Support Services (CSS) area and to users of the Service Management (SM) standards.  It is these standads that are intended to be used for the planning and scheduling of space comm services.

For reference I have attached an information model of what it presently in the IOAG RF assets registry, with items in red showing the proposed extensions to allow this to connect to the CSS required Sites and Apertures registries to be used for scheduling.  The IOAG RF asset registry is located in the SANA set of Candidate registries.  This is located at: http://sanaregistry.org/cgi/registry-auth?id=rf_assets.  You will need to request an access token (and be on the list of acceptable viewers) before you can see the registry.

Issues with registry consistency and contents:

  1.  About 1/2 of the assets do not have any name present
  2.  Some names are not unique (they are repeated)
  3.  There is no distinction in the names that reflects that the antennas are at different sites
  4.  In some cases the name of the site (location) is missing
  5.  In most cases the location information (longitude / latitude) is missing
  6.  When it is provided the lat / lon is sometimes in ddmmss and sometimes in dd.dddddd format
  7.  In almost all cases the elevation info is missing
  8.  In many cases the asset type (DS, EO, NE) is missing

Note that the most complete data sets come from the following: SSAT, KSAT, SSC Group, INPE, INTA, JHU, and SANSA.  All of the rest are incomplete in one or more ways.  See screen shots of one densely populated area and one more sparse one, for comparison.  The last attachment shows the top level of the registry and the column headers.

Best regards, Peter



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20160127/04ee8ced/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: RF Asset Registry (Existing IOAG) v1.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 140839 bytes
Desc: RF Asset Registry (Existing IOAG) v1.pdf
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20160127/04ee8ced/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IOAG RF Asset dense  2016-01-27 at 10.16.52 AM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 354611 bytes
Desc: IOAG RF Asset dense  2016-01-27 at 10.16.52 AM.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20160127/04ee8ced/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IOAG RF Asset sparse 2016-01-27 at 10.17.37 AM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 200148 bytes
Desc: IOAG RF Asset sparse 2016-01-27 at 10.17.37 AM.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20160127/04ee8ced/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IOAG RF Asset header 2016-01-27 at 10.25.05 AM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 266469 bytes
Desc: IOAG RF Asset header 2016-01-27 at 10.25.05 AM.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20160127/04ee8ced/attachment-0002.png>