[CESG] CESG polls stucked with ADs/DADs conditions
Shames, Peter M (312B)
peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov
Wed Sep 6 15:30:25 UTC 2017
Gippo,
Rules is rules. To quote from CCSDS Organization and Processes, Sec B1.2, pg b-2-3:
B1.2 RECOMMENDED STANDARD BRANCH
Documents on the Recommended Standard branch of the Normative Track are as follows: a) CCSDS Proposed Draft Recommended Standard (White Book)
…
A Proposed Draft Recommended Standard should have no known technical omissions with respect to the requirements placed upon it. However, this requirement may be waived by the CESG to allow a specification to advance to the Proposed Draft Recommended Standard state when it is considered to be useful and necessary (and timely) even with known technical omissions.
The document itself says that it is incomplete. And there can be no great urgency in publishing it as is, or without the inclusion of a VCM approach that works for all CCSDS codes and modulations, because the SCCC and DVB, with their different, existing, closed, approaches, are already published.
I am really puzzled by some of your statements. This is not about penalizing someone, or some group; nor about one agency vs another. This is about the quality of CCSDS documents and our roles, as WG chairs and Area Directors in ensuring the quality of those documents. It is a poor enough situation that this incomplete document has taken up this much CESG time. I would in no way support also wasting agency time in reviewing a document that is stated to be incomplete. That violates our principles and is a waste of resources.
Best regards, Peter
From: Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>
Date: Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 10:58 PM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: Bernie Edwards <Bernard.L.Edwards at nasa.gov>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>, Dennis K Lee <dennis.k.lee at jpl.nasa.gov>, "Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int" <Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int>, Kenneth Andrews <kenneth.s.andrews at jpl.nasa.gov>, Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>, "Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int" <Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int>, Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>
Subject: Re: [CESG] CESG polls stucked with ADs/DADs conditions
Peter,
no way I can agree with you on this.
The document is complete as it captures what is available today.
As you can see at https://cwe.ccsds.org/fm/Lists/Projects/DispForm.aspx?ID=398&Source=https%3A%2F%2Fcwe%2Eccsds%2Eorg%2Ffm%2FLists%2FCharters%2FDispForm%2Easpx%3FID%3D32 for the Description of Document: " This Magenta Book defines normative, controlling guidance for the implementation of Variable Code and Modulation (VCM) systems using coding and modulation schemes standardized in CCSDS." and therefore the contents match the target.
You simply penalise the complete WG because an Agency is late (surely for good reasons) in contributing to other books.
And remember that the poll was for agency review and not for publication, so that agency would have had the opportunity for advancing the work e.d. at this fall meeting (even if they did not succeed from the project approval in March 2014)
Regards
Gippo
From: "Shames, Peter M (312B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
To: "Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int" <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>
Cc: "Nestor.Peccia at esa.int" <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>, "Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int" <Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int>, "Andrews, Kenneth S (332B)" <kenneth.s.andrews at jpl.nasa.gov>, "Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int" <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>, "Bernard L. Edwards" <Bernard.L.Edwards at nasa.gov>, "CCSDS CESG --" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>, "Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int" <Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int>, "Lee, Dennis K (332G)" <dennis.k.lee at jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: 05/09/2017 23:57
Subject: Re: [CESG] CESG polls stucked with ADs/DADs conditions
________________________________
Gippo,
Putting forward documents that are clearly incomplete, and even say so, is a waste of all of our time. If you wish to believe that I am "the bad guy" and reject this, that's fine.
But please, all of you who had a roll in sending this forward in an incomplete state are really the ones who bear the responsibility for this problem, not me.
Regards, Peter
From: Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>
Date: Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 2:31 PM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>, "Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int" <Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int>, Kenneth Andrews <kenneth.s.andrews at jpl.nasa.gov>, Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>, Bernie Edwards <Bernard.L.Edwards at nasa.gov>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>, "Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int" <Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int>, Dennis K Lee <dennis.k.lee at jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: [CESG] CESG polls stucked with ADs/DADs conditions
Not at all.
Putting conditions that cannot be accomplished means rejecting the poll.
Gian Paolo
Sent from my iPhone
On 5. Sep 2017, at 23:29, Shames, Peter M (312B) <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>> wrote:
Gippo, et al,
Just to be entirely clear. My condition was to ask that the document meet the terms and maturity status required of all documents to be sent out for agency review. I did not "REJECT" it, I asked that it be completed, as required.
Dear Massimo,
Since the document itself says "For systems compliant with CCSDS 131.0-B-2 further work is needed. " I think it is clear that the WG understands that the document is not yet complete. I think it wisest to use the available time and effort to remedy that, and when it is complete, and at an adequate level of maturity, it should then be proposed again for agency review.
Best regards, Peter
It is up to the WG to meet the usual maturity conditions such that the document does not include statements like that. I think the correct characterization is that the WG chose to WITHDRAW the document because it is not mature, and they could not remedy that in time, and not that it was rejected.
Best regards, Peter
From: CESG <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>> on behalf of Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int<mailto:Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>>
Date: Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 2:44 AM
To: Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int<mailto:Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>>
Cc: "Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int<mailto:Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int>" <Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int<mailto:Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int>>, Kenneth Andrews <kenneth.s.andrews at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:kenneth.s.andrews at jpl.nasa.gov>>, Klaus-Juergen Schulz <Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int<mailto:Klaus-Juergen.Schulz at esa.int>>, Bernie Edwards <Bernard.L.Edwards at nasa.gov<mailto:Bernard.L.Edwards at nasa.gov>>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: Re: [CESG] CESG polls stucked with ADs/DADs conditions
Nestor,
For the SLS VCM Protocol RB it has been clarified that the SEA Condition was actually a REJECT.
SLS disagreement was expressed in mail dated 08/08/2017 14:30
For SLS Optical Comm Physical Layer RB the WG is working on replies to the conditions.
Regards
Gian Paolo
PS The relevant WG chairs are copied here for information with the request to not do reply to all.
From: Nestor.Peccia at esa.int<mailto:Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>
To: "CESG -- CCSDS-Engineering Steering Group \(cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>\) \(cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>\)" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Date: 05/09/2017 11:12
Subject: [CESG] CESG polls stucked with ADs/DADs conditions
Sent by: "CESG" <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>>
________________________________
Dear all,
There are 6 CESG closed polls with "not yet solved" conditions. The 6 polls are on documents to be issued for Agency Review.
i.e.
1. SLS VCM Protocol RB
2. SLS Optical Comm Physical Layer RB
3. CSS Guidelines for spec of CSTS RB
4. MOIMS MO MAL Binding to ZMTP transport
5. MOIMS MO Data Product bDistribution RB
6. MOIMS MO Common Services RB
It means that we have missed the opportunity to discuss the potential RIDs at the F17 meeting in Netherlands.
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.
_______________________________________________
CESG mailing list
CESG at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:CESG at mailman.ccsds.org>
https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/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.
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.
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/20170906/4f2c4536/attachment.html>
More information about the CESG
mailing list