[CESG] Agenda for CESG Webex # 2 on 1st July 2016

[Scott, Keith L.]

I'm on vacation and may or may not be able to make the call tomorrow.  Below are comments on the proposed CESG report format and the RID system pre-requirements.  The RID system comments include many from Scott Burleigh.


CESG Report Format

"XXX Area Report" slide:

The 'Goals' -- goals of the WG or goals for this meeting cycle (suggest for this meeting cycle) but clarify regardless (to keep my WG chairs from asking)

For status/progress/summary and problems/issues: I think 2-3 lines of text OR 2-3 bullets (keep whatever the content is to 2-3 lines maximum)?


"Executive Summary" slide

This is really a list of book statuses for the area more than an executive summary.  If we keep the document schedules by WG, would something more like a summary of the Area progress be better here (or rename the slide to 'Area document status' or some such and maybe add yet another slide that really is some sort of executive summary of the area?


RID System Pre-Requirements (The Draft-2 version from Brian's email June 21, 10:59AM)
This looks great, and a well-formatted, tracked RID system will, I think, help us a lot.

PRE_REQ-001-a
What's the difference between "Why the change is being requested" and "Rationale for the requested change"?

PRE_REQ-001-b
I strongly think all authors should be able to see all RIDs (not only those from their organization).

PRE_REQ-002-a
Can a RID be injected into the system past the first level?  That is, if the Agency, or the international coordinator, wants to inject a RID, must it start at the center level?  I think the ability to inject RIDs at agency or international coordinator level would be helpful.

PRE_REQ-002-b
What are the 'teams'? Are these the various agencies?  Is the deadline for center and agency reviews the same (seems wrong)?  Is the intent to have a 'final' RID cutoff date and back off by a week PER LEVEL of review?

PRE_REQ-002-c
So how many people have signature authority at each level? If it's just one or a few, then informal coordination among them seems reasonable (hey, don't uncheck the box I just checked!).  Is there a 'not reviewed at agency level' checkbox as well as for center level?

The text mentions 'disapproval' and 'rejection' -- are these the same thing?

PRE_REQ-002-f
"Immediately after the CENTER RID closure... ..., a center level submission reviewer..."?

PRE_REQ-002-h
Who is the 'user' -- the RID coordinator for the current level?

It might be good to allow at least additions (for clarification) to existing RIDS?  That might shortcut sending RIDs back down the signature levels to be resubmitted.

PRE_REQ-002-i
"Procedurally, if the user gets something from "other"... but looks like it should have, the user will contact the agency lead." -- which agency?

PRE_REQ-002-j
Are both "nots" in the first sentence correct?  As written, a RID that is approved is NOT forwarded to the next level.  Seems wrong.

PRE_REQ-002-k
Again, some sort of 'comments' section per RID might be useful here?

PRE_REQ-003-a
How is the coordination expected to be accomplished?  By email / phone?


Polling Pre-Requirements
I like the 'not yet voted' column.

So according to item (e) there will no longer be a way to attach a file of RIDs?  Everything has to be entered in the edit box?  I very much like the idea of a more structured entry format -- I'd almost favor a list of individual conditions with the same type of information as the RID system but probably not all conditions will fit that format for e.g. CESG polls to release for agency review.  What do others think?


--Keith

________________________________
From: CESG <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of Nestor.Peccia at esa.int <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2016 11:11 AM
To: CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group(cesg at mailman.ccsds.org)(cesg at mailman.ccsds.org)
Subject: [CESG] Agenda for CESG Webex # 2 on 1st July 2016

Dear all,

Please find below an Agenda proposal

  1.  Document Status Queue
  2.  Polls with conditions not yet resolved
  3.  New template for CESG Report to CMC (to be delivered by NP asap)
  4.  12 meeting rooms maximal for Fall 16 meeting at Rome
  5.  Security section (boilerplate text) to be added to BB/MB template
  6.  Template for Concept paper ?
  7.  RID System requirements (if Brian distributes it)
  8.  Polling System Requirements (if Brian distributes it)
  9.  SEA XML SIG: XML Policy document: Status
  10. MOIMS Telerobotics WG: Status
  11. SLS Optical WG: Near earth HDR Status
  12. AOB
  13.

Comments more than welcome


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/20160630/a9362b08/attachment.html>