[CESG] FW: CCSDS-OMG Liaison: Satellite Command & Control Message Specification (C2MS)

Thu Aug 16 22:18:52 UTC 2018

CESG Chairs,

I will be on leave during the teleconference in early September, so I am sending an email to note a concern that I have.

I am concerned about the exchange listed below between our OMG and CCSDS liaisons, particularly with statements that appear to have been issued as the CCSDS liaison without consultation of at least CESG not to mention CMC.

There may in fact be issues between MOIMS SM+C WG and OMG SDTF.   But CCSDS is not just MOIMS SM+C.  My experience is that I have found OMG GEMS standard to be quite complimentary to the work of the CSS Area and therefore have found the liaison with OMG to be useful.   To me it is objectionable for the CCSDS liaison to question the usefulness of the liaison prior to consulting with the rest of CCSDS.  From the email exchange it sounds like OMG provided due process relative to its rules and governance.  As such it can be argued that a strategy session inside CCSDS should have occurred to assess the situation, provide an analysis of alternatives and consider other courses of action.  For example, perhaps CCSDS could have considered the opportunities brought forward by their RFC process rather than unilaterally (without any consultation at the level of CESG as far as I can tell), calling the liaison into question.

For the record, I will note that we (CESG) have indeed been asked to comment and review on an analysis prepared by DLR with regard to the CCSDS MOIMS and OMG SDTF.   This is as it should be.  But I want to emphasize this should have occurred prior to any further exchange in the name of liaison for the all of CCSDS.

Best regards,
-Erik

From: CESG <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> On Behalf Of Mario.Merri at esa.int
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 1:27 AM
To: Steve MacLaird <maclaird at omg.org>
Cc: cesg at mailman.ccsds.org; Larry L. Johnson <larry at omg.org>; danford.s.smith at nasa.gov; space at omg.org; liaison at omg.org; sam at brightascension.com
Subject: Re: [CESG] FW: CCSDS-OMG Liaison: Satellite Command & Control Message Specification (C2MS)

Dear Steve,

it is very disappointing that the OMG, after a strenuous discussion of 1.25 hours on my 10 line email, has decided to move forward without waiting for the analysis in the Technical Note that was announced and is under finalisation. The motivation adduced for the decision, i.e. that "the consensus of the Space DTF and OMG AB that the note below was your position ...", is offensive and reductionist: I deliberatively did not participate in the WG discussion to avoid influencing. The outcome of the discussion in the WG, which I reported in my email, is that 3 space agencies out of 4 that are active in the WG, i.e. 75%, had identified notable overlaps: it is not my opinion!

Thanks for the offer to provide/clarify the OMG's P&Ps and processes, but there is no need. I will consult with the CCSDS Engineering Steering Group and question the usefulness of a technical liaison between OMG and CCSDS in these conditions

I will still provide you with the technical note, once available. Please note that the technical note is also a collective work supported by the same 3 agencies and it is not even led by ESA.

Regards,

__Mario

From:        "Steve MacLaird" <maclaird at omg.org<mailto:maclaird at omg.org>>
To:        <Mario.Merri at esa.int<mailto:Mario.Merri at esa.int>>
Date:        22/06/2018 15:35
Subject:        FW: CCSDS-OMG Liaison: Satellite Command & Control Message Specification (C2MS)
________________________________

Mario -

            I rec'd a bounce back that you did not receive the below email despite the same address.

Steve

Steven A. MacLaird, Col (Ret), USAF

Senior Vice President, Gov't & Industry Strategy

+1 703.231.6335 (USA)

[cid:image001.png at 01D3CBF6.CB5D0260]

From: Steve MacLaird [mailto:maclaird at omg.org]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2018 9:22 AM
To: 'Mario.Merri at esa.int '
Cc: 'Larry Johnson'; 'Kizzort, Brad'; 'Luis Rodriquez'; 'Dan Smith'; 'sam at brightascension.com'; 'cesg at mailman.ccsds.org'; 'Juergen Boldt'
Subject: FW: CCSDS-OMG Liaison: Satellite Command & Control Message Specification (C2MS)

Mario -

            I wanted to be the first to notify you of the results of the Object Management Group's (OMG) Space Domain Task Force (DTF) and Architecture Board (AB) decisions.  Your note created a great deal of conversation, dialog and debate, since receipt while here in Boston at OMG's Quarterly Technical Committee (TC).

            Two days ago during the Space DTF, they spent an hour discussing your email to determine whether or not to forward onto the AB for vote.  The pro's and con's were discussed with the largest concern being if the AB accepted the concerns in your email below and sided with you, the MCMS RFC would be dead and never allowed to become an RFP.  Therefore the Space DTF's decision to vote to send to the AB would be very risky and all avenues and scenarios possible were discussed.  In the end, the MCMS RFC was voted to move to the AB. Please note, on Monday June 18th, I sent your email below to the AB for their review per the AB Chairman's request even though it was sent to me versus the formal process and being 7 days late to the 4 week rule.  This allowed all the AB members to review all the documentation before meeting yesterday afternoon and discussed it at the AB Plenary on the 18th.

            Today during the AB, they had a lengthy and painful discussion that lasted 1.25 hours on MCMS and your email.  Per OMG's Policies and Procedures (P&P) your email was reviewed, discussed, debated and alternatives explored.  I want to let you know, that in 1.5 hours preceding the MCMS discussion, 4 RFCs and 2 RFPs were reviewed.  A motion was made and seconded, discussion followed, amendment made on intellectual property, and voted on.  Before the vote, a dissenting opinion was raised and explored/discussed when a AB Member called the question for vote.  Eight (8) votes were for the motion, one (1) against and 1 abstained and the motioned passed to approve the MCMS RFC.

            I, the Space DTF, and OMG value your, ESA's and CCSDS's inputs and would like to have a closer collaboration throughout OMG's and CCSDS processes.  It was the consensus of the Space DTF and OMG AB that the note below was your position and possibly that of ESA's.  Your email was the only note of contention received.  If I need to clarify OMG's P&Ps and processes, I can provide and or put you in touch with the right contacts to answer your, ESA, CNES or DLA's questions.  Our next meeting will be in September in Ottawa Canada.  You can find out more at www.omg.org<http://www.omg.org/>.

Take Care -

Steve

Steven A. MacLaird, Col (Ret), USAF

Senior Vice President, Gov't & Industry Strategy

+1 703.231.6335 (USA)

[cid:image001.png at 01D3CBF6.CB5D0260]

From: Mario.Merri at esa.int<mailto:Mario.Merri at esa.int> [mailto:Mario.Merri at esa.int]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 4:54 AM
To: Steven A. MacLaird
Cc: liaison at omg.org<mailto:liaison at omg.org>; Larry L. Johnson; space at omg.org<mailto:space at omg.org>; danford.s.smith at nasa.gov<mailto:danford.s.smith at nasa.gov>; sam at brightascension.com<mailto:sam at brightascension.com>; cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: CCSDS-OMG Liaison: Satellite Command & Control Message Specification (C2MS)

Dear Steve,

in the context of the CCSDS-OMG liaison I would like to inform you that during the last CCSDS Technical Meetings in Gaithersburg (09-13 April 2018) reservations had been raised on the proposed OMG standard (RFC):

Satellite Command & Control Message Specification (C2MS).

In particular, three space agencies via their members in the CCSDS Spacecraft & Control Working Group have identified notable overlaps between the above perspective document and the on-going work of the working group on Mission Operations (MO) Services. These Space Agencies (CNES - French Space Agency, DLR - German Space Agency, and ESA - European Space Agency) are producing a Technical Note to substantiate the overlap, which will be available in the second half of June.

Clearly, in the spirit of the liaison, both CCSDS and OMG should strive to avoid overlaps and duplications, in favour of reciprocally adopting relevant standards, as already done for instance by the CCSDS with the adoption of the OMG XTCE standard.

Sincerely,

Mario Merri
CCSDS liaison to OMG

―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
ESA - European Space Agency

Dr. Mario MERRI
Head of Mission Data Systems Division (OPS-GD)

Directorate of Operations
European Space Operations Centre - ESOC
Robert-Bosch-Str. 5, D-64293 Darmstadt, Germany
Tel +49 (6151) 90 2292 | Mario.Merri at esa.int<mailto:Mario.Merri at esa.int>  *  www.esa.int/esoc
―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――

This message is sent for information and/or discussion purposes only.

It shall neither be binding nor construed as constituting a commitment for ESA.

It is intended only for the recipient(s) named above.

It may contain proprietary information and/or protected content.

Any unauthorised disclosure, use, retention or dissemination is prohibited.

If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately.

ESA applies appropriate organisational measures to protect personal data.

In case of data privacy queries, please contact the ESA Data Protection Officer (dpo at esa.int<mailto:dpo at esa.int>).

Thank you.