[CESG] FW: [SSG] Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Mon Dec 17 17:44:13 UTC 2018

Gippo, et al,

I am formulating a specific resolution to make these changes.  That said, my apologies for not sending along these tables on the note I sent earlier.  I had sent them to the SSG, but did not attach them to this note to the CESG.  I did get feedback from the SANA that they will have to carefully review any possible impacts in S-band and C-band overlaps since they have done allocations in those band bins, as follows:.

The consequence of changing eg. the S-band boundaries (since it is one of the most used band) might
be that there will be some overlapping as a current S-band Q-SCID (for example 3.5GHz) and a current
C-band Q-SCID (4.2GHz) could end up being in the same C-band with the proposed changes.

It is unfortunate that no one caught this issue until now, or if they did we did not recognize the nature of the potential problem.

Regards, Peter

From: Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>
Date: Friday, November 30, 2018 at 5:53 AM
To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>, "SANA Steering Group (SSG)" <ssg at mailman.ccsds.org>, Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>, "Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int" <Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int>, Dennis K Lee <Dennis.K.Lee at jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: [CESG] FW: [SSG] Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Peter,
        can you please clarify what is really the requested correction against the current    https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/320x0m7.pdf ?
I tried to find it through the sequence of mails attached to the attached mail that contain attached mails but I really got confused.
I can only think this is an update to Table 2-1: ITU/IEEE Frequency Bands but it is not clear which one precisely.
I added SLS-RFM Chairs to this distribution for the relevant checks.

Last but not least, I remember we had some discussion with CSS guys about Frequency bands definitions in https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/902x1b1.pdf
Since the Simple Schedule Format Blue Book refers to that table, I think that a statement/check by CSS Area about possible side effects is also required.

Enrico, Dennnis,
        once the proposed correction is clearly defined, can you please and comment?

Thank you all and have a nice week end

Gian Paolo

From:        "Shames, Peter M \(312B\) via CESG" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
To:        "SANA Steering Group (SSG)" <ssg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Cc:        Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Date:        29-11-18 21:51
Subject:        [CESG] FW: [SSG] Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re:  Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17
Sent by:        "CESG" <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>
________________________________

Dear SSG,

Do any of you not concur that we should resolve this issue now by aligning the SCID frequency ranges used by the SANA to do allocations with the ITU values?

We will let the document catch up as we can get the Corrigendum edits done.  Tom Gannett has said that he will fold this corrigendum to the SCID assignment procedure, CCSDS 320.0m7, into the changes needed to accommodate USLP.

I acknowledge that it is not the process we would normally follow, and would not want it to set a general precedent of any sort, but I think this is a special case where we made a mistake and really should correct it as quickly as possible to avoid allocation problems.

Please signal your agreement, or lack thereof, by return email.

Thanks, Peter

From: "osvaldo.peinado at dlr.de" <osvaldo.peinado at dlr.de>
Date: Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 11:08 AM
To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
Cc: "SANA Steering Group (SSG)" <ssg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: AW: [SSG] Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Totally agree with you Peter

Von: Shames, Peter M (312B) [mailto:Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. November 2018 19:02
An: Peinado, Osvaldo Luis; thomas.gannett at tgannett.net
Cc: SANA Steering Group (SSG)
Betreff: Re: [SSG] Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Hi Osvaldo,

That is more or less what I had in mind.  After talking to my Spectrum Manager I think we made a mis-step in using the IEEE "RADAR" letter and frequency designations instead of the ITU ones.  The RADAR designators were easy to find and clear enough, but they ignore the finer points of the exact ranges of frequencies that are used by the Spectrum Managers of all agencies to assign frequencies to the SRS, EES, and FSS missions we service.  As a result some of the IEEE frequency boundaries had the effect of splitting ITU frequency allocation ranges.  This change fixes that.

The important thing we need to do with this registry is to ensure that any mission using CCSDS protocols, at their ITU compliant assigned frequencies, has a SCID that is unique within their correct frequency bin.

Regards, Peter

From: "osvaldo.peinado at dlr.de" <osvaldo.peinado at dlr.de>
Date: Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 1:29 AM
To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
Subject: AW: [SSG] Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Hi Peter

It will be possible to accept this request (because it will match with the changes) and do as Tom proposed the update later on?

Just and idea

Osvaldo

Von: SSG [mailto:ssg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] Im Auftrag von Shames, Peter M (312B) via SSG
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. November 2018 22:02
An: Thomas Gannett; 'SANA Steering Group (SSG)'
Betreff: Re: [SSG] Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Hi Tom,

Ok.  I think we need to get this sorted out soon since we have an SCID allocation to make.  I'm going to assume that these changes will go through the whole process unscathed and recommend that the SANA use the new bin boundaries in doing the allocation.  I am frankly surprised that this has not surfaced before.

Remind me, were you going to make the USLP mods yourself or did you need some clues?

Thanks, Peter

From: Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
Date: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 10:01 AM
To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, "SANA Steering Group (SSG)" <ssg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Cc: 'Space Assigned Numbers Authority' <info at sanaregistry.org>
Subject: RE: Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: [SSG] Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Peter: I propose holding off on the USLP corrigendum and doing both as a single corrigendum. –Tom

Logothete, L.L.C.

thomas.gannett at tgannett.net

+1 443 472 0805

From: Shames, Peter M (312B) [mailto:Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 12:49 PM
To: SANA Steering Group (SSG)
Cc: Tom Gannett; Space Assigned Numbers Authority
Subject: Proposed changes to SCID frequency bins, was Re: [SSG] Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17
Importance: High

Guys,

I have just met with the JPL Spectrum Manager.  It's a little funny, but in the allocation of these frequency bins for the CCSDS 320.0-M-7 update we did not pick up this disconnect between the IEEE Std 521TM-2002(R2009) boundaries for RADAR frequency bins and the sets of specific frequencies allocated by the ITU for space research (SRS), Earth exploration (EESE), and fixed satellite (FSS) services.  The frequencies for the IEEE Radar letter designators (C, X, Ka, etc) are similar to, but not completely aligned with, these ITU allocations, and that seems to be the source of the problem.  The ITU frequency range allocations are defined at a much finer granularity than these letter designated bins that reflect our common use.  I used the attached table of NTIA / ITU frequency designations, and feedback from our JPL spectrum manager, for guidance.

For our purposes what we need is a set of bins that align with the commonly allocated ITU frequencies for SRS, EES, and FSS, such that they associate with a set of spacecraft and the frequencies that they are defined, by international agreement, to operate at.  This mis-alignment has caused some of the bins we adopted from the Radar designations to be a little out of step with how our space operations community has been used to referencing them.  We need to make some changes to these in order to get the frequency ranges associated with these designators to align with the ITU allocations and common usage.

I want to get SSG agreement on this before we finalize this, and I want to ask for CESG concurrence.  Ultimately we will need to modify the 320.0-B document, using a corrigendum, and also edit the associated SANA bin frequency ranges.   The attached spreadsheet has the current Table 2-1 from CCSDS 320.0-M-7 and the proposed changes.

Please review this and indicate if you see any issues.

Thanks, Peter

From: SSG <ssg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of "SANA Steering Group (SSG)" <ssg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Reply-To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 12:07 PM
To: Space Assigned Numbers Authority <info at sanaregistry.org>
Cc: "SANA Steering Group (SSG)" <ssg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: Re: [SSG] Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Hi Guys,

I am researching this.  I do not know if it was a lack of precision in the real frequencies for the specified bands or if it is some local usage of "band" names that is causing the confusion.  We need to tie the requests to actual frequencies, regardless of what they are called in any given country.

I'll get back to you as soon as I have an answer.

Thanks, Peter

From: Space Assigned Numbers Authority <info at sanaregistry.org>
Date: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 6:57 AM
To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: Space Assigned Numbers Authority <info at sanaregistry.org>
Subject: Fwd: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Hi Peter,

We got a SCID request with frequency information not matching the

frequency band mapping defined in CCCSDS 320.0-M-7. As we asked for

feedback we got the response below and we are not qualified to answer it.

Could you please review it?

Thank you.

Best regards,

Julien Bernard

Space Assigned Numbers Authority

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject: RE: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 14:57:21 +0000

From: BOIROUX Philippe <philippe.boiroux at thalesaleniaspace.com<mailto:philippe.boiroux at thalesaleniaspace.com>>

To: Space Assigned Numbers Authority <info at sanaregistry.org<mailto:info at sanaregistry.org>>,

ESA_SCID at esa.int<mailto:ESA_SCID at esa.int> <ESA_SCID at esa.int<mailto:ESA_SCID at esa.int>>

Dear All,

If I understand correctly w.r.t the IEEE FB Name column of the table

(and not to the Near Earth Downlink column) and as our TM frequencies

are into the range :

- 11700 MHz up to12500 MHz (considered as Ku Band for us), we have to

declare our TM into the band  X-Band "7-12 GHz" (for the range 11700 MHz

up to 12000 MHz) and Ku-Band "12-18 GHz" (for the range 12000 MHz up to

12700 MHz)

- 18177.5 MHz up to 20075 MHz (considered as Ka Band for us), we have to

declare our TM into the band  K-Band "18-27 GHz"

Is it correct ?

Best regards

[@@ THALES ALENIA SPACE INTERNAL @@]

-----Message d'origine-----

De : Space Assigned Numbers Authority [mailto:info at sanaregistry.org]

Envoyé : vendredi 23 novembre 2018 16:48

À : BOIROUX Philippe;  ESA_SCID at esa.int<mailto:ESA_SCID at esa.int>

Cc : Space Assigned Numbers Authority

Objet : Re: Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Philippe,

Whatever the operating location is, your frequency band mapping does not

match with the one in CCCSDS 320.0-M-7 document.

The problem is rather that we need you to confirm that you selected the

correct value for frequency band, considering the CCSDS mapping.

Best regards,

Julien Bernard

Space Assigned Numbers Authority

On 18-11-23 04 h 13, BOIROUX Philippe wrote:

Dear All,

Is the problem linked to the "Operating Location" ?

What "operating Location" do we have to declare for a telecom satellite ? Perhaps it is better to select  "------" instead of  "Near Earth" .

Best regards

Ph. Boiroux

[@@ THALES ALENIA SPACE INTERNAL @@]

-----Message d'origine-----

De : Space Assigned Numbers Authority [mailto:info at sanaregistry.org]

Envoyé : jeudi 22 novembre 2018 15:45

À :  ESA_SCID at esa.int<mailto:ESA_SCID at esa.int>; BOIROUX Philippe

Cc : Space Assigned Numbers Authority

Objet : Confirmation on SCID request for SES-17

Dear Harald and Philippe,

We need some confirmation on your SCIDs request for SES-17.

In the two blocks of information provided below and according to the

mapping (see joined document) from CCCSDS 320.0-M-7

(https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/320x0m7.pdf), the frequency band you

provided does not match with the frequencies from the special request:

Organization: ESA [1.3.112.4.1.12]

Spacecraft: SES-17 [1.3.112.4.7.1304]

Agency Representative: Dr Harald Ernst [1.3.112.4.2.39]

Version: 1

Link Type: Return

Channel Protocol: TLM

Frequency Band: Ku-Band

Special Request: Flexible from 11700 MHz up to 12500 MHz

Comments:

Created By: Philippe Boiroux [1.3.112.4.2.138]

Status: Provisional

Organization: ESA [1.3.112.4.1.12]

Spacecraft: SES-17 [1.3.112.4.7.1304]

Agency Representative: Dr Harald Ernst [1.3.112.4.2.39]

Version: 1

Link Type: Return

Channel Protocol: TLM

Frequency Band: Ka-Band

Special Request: From 18177.5 MHz up to 20075 MHz

Comments:

Created By: Philippe Boiroux [1.3.112.4.2.138]

Status: Provisional

Could you please confirm your request or provide us with some corrections.

Thank you.

_______________________________________________
CESG mailing list
CESG at mailman.ccsds.org
https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cesg

This message 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).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20181217/214e2878/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 320x0m7 Table 2-1 mods.xlsx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet
Size: 16397 bytes
Desc: 320x0m7 Table 2-1 mods.xlsx
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20181217/214e2878/attachment-0001.xlsx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: NTIA & ITU Freq Bands Red Book 4b_17_9.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 641004 bytes
Desc: NTIA & ITU Freq Bands Red Book 4b_17_9.pdf
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20181217/214e2878/attachment-0001.pdf>