[CESG] CESG Telecon 5th September - Minute of Meeting

Tue Oct 2 17:10:31 UTC 2018

Dear Margherita,

This is not consensus, the term for it is administrative fiat.  The issue is far broader than the WG not reaching consensus.  The issue is that several of our procedures, in the WG and in the CESG, were ignored in the way that this was handled.

The fact is that this topic was addressed in the CESG telecon and I strongly object to you making a choice to ignore that, and by that action, document the meeting is an inaccurate way.  You may think I am making a mountain out of a molehill.  I think I am standing up for the principles by which this organization has been run since the beginning.

I really must insist that the minutes reflect what occurred and not this bowdlerized, and inaccurate, version that we have now.

Regards, Peter

From: "Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int" <Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int>
Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 6:05 AM
To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>, CESG <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>, Mario Merri <Mario.Merri at esa.int>
Subject: Re: [CESG] CESG Telecon 5th September - Minute of Meeting

Dear Peter and All,
this matter is getting too far, and  it deserves further discussion at the Berlin meeting.

I invite everybody to only look into the real issue about non-consensus in the WG and about the ( claimed) duplication of standards.
The problem shall be tackled, beyond procedures and formalism. We (=CESG) have an engineering (= technical) role, and we shall aim at  resolving the issue on  technical grounds

To all : the discussion shall be resumed at the Fall Meeting.
The Minute of Meeting is in its final shape and will not be updated.

Kind regards,
Margherita

--------------------------------------------------------------
Margherita di Giulio
Data Systems Infrastructure Division (OPS-GI)

European Space Agency ESA/ESOC
Robert-Bosch-Str. 5
D-64293 Darmstadt - Germany
Tel: +49-6151-902779
e-mail: Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int

From:        "Shames, Peter M (312B)" <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
To:        "Mario.Merri at esa.int" <Mario.Merri at esa.int>
Cc:        "cesg at mailman.ccsds.org" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Date:        01/10/2018 20:00
Subject:        Re: [CESG] CESG Telecon  5th September -  Minute of Meeting
Sent by:        "CESG" <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>
________________________________

Dear Mario,

We have a real difference of opinion here.  I am going to leave out of the discussion the editorialized version of the discussions in the Gaithersburg CESG meeting minutes and just focus on what actually occurred during and leading up to this 5 Sept meeting.

During that 5 Sept meeting we did have a discussion of the following:
·         That the SM&C WG did not reach consensus on the contents of the Technical Note.  In point of fact, we had the original CESG meeting where this was discussed on 16 April, but the whole SM&C WG did not see the TN until 1 August.  To quote the current MoM:  " Once the TN became available, M. Merri distributed it to the SM&C WG and to the CESG requesting comments (by 31Aug)."  According to my email records Mario sent this out to the whole WG on 1 August 2018, at 12:56 AM PDT, months after the CESG meeting.  It was first sent to the CESG on 25 July 2018.
·         The documented CCSDS procedures are to reach WG consensus on materials before they are brought to the CESG.  As stated above, that did not occur in this case.  At this point the only possible interpretation of this TN is that it was an agency position paper, not a WG supported TN.
·         As a part of the documented consensus process it is possible for a WG, or an individual, to ask the AD, and then the CESG, for an independent review of an issue that is contentious.  See A02.1-Y-4, Annex G on the CCSDS Consensus Process.  The whole organization is supposed to operate like this.  Since the WG did not see this TN until after the CESG discussion it is impossible to argue that this process was followed.
·         Furthermore, this agency position paper was passed to the CMC without it ever having had a technical review and agreement by the CESG.  In our normal operations procedures we are to "use a disciplined process to define, document, and dispose technical issues" and it is only when there is a block to consensus that an issue would get escalated to the next higher level in the organization.  That did not occur and CESG discussion and consensus was bypassed prior to sending this TN to the CMC.
·         In this case the actual flow of information avoided or bypassed all of these normal steps and we failed to do due diligence and to reach consensus at several levels.  This was masked in the MoM from the Gaithersburg CESG meeting, but it is evident in these MoM where it is clear that the WG never reached consensus in the first place and that CESG consensus on escalating this to the CMC was not achieved before that occurred.

We did have this discussion during the 5 Sept CESG Telecon, even though it was in a more abbreviated form than this, and without the specific CCSDS Org & Proc references.  However, reference was made verbally to the Org & Proc and to the fact that we had operated outside the norms.  This was stated explicitly.  Because of this I request that these facts be recorded in the MoM of the 5 Sept telecon and I draw your attention to Annex G and the way that the consensus process is supposed to work.  I am not willing to accept editorializing that would remove this discussion from the record.

This is, in fact, what happened and we should not confuse the matter.

Almost everything about the way that this TN was handled was out of the norm and I think we need to understand why that occurred and avoid it in the future.

Best regards, Peter

From: Mario Merri <Mario.Merri at esa.int>
Date: Monday, October 1, 2018 at 8:45 AM
To: Peter Shames <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: Re: [CESG] CESG Telecon 5th September - Minute of Meeting

Hi Peter,

I think your new text confuses the situation, which is well explained in the text above, i.e.

"CESG concluded that ESA, CNES, and DLR members of the SM&C WG would produce a Technical Note containing the analysis of the overlap." This sentence is clear and faithfully describes what had happened. On the other hand, your proposed change, i.e.

"The CESG discussed the fact that the SM&C WG had not reached consensus on this issue before sending the document to the CESG ... Both of these actions are outside the norm of CCSDS procedures." is not clear and seems to contradict the sentence above.

From the sentence above, it is clear that there was no consensus in the SM&C WG, yet the CESG instructed the MOIMS AD to have the TN produced by ESA, CNES, and DLR to elaborate on the alleged overlapping. This seems to me a prerogative of the CESG and as such within the norm of the CCSDS procedures. This is what happened and we should not confuse the matter.

I propose to delete your proposed additions.

Regards,

__Mario

From:        "Shames, Peter M (312B)" <Peter.M.Shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
To:        "Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int" <Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int>, "cesg at mailman.ccsds.org" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Date:        01/10/2018 16:58
Subject:        Re: [CESG] CESG Telecon  5th September -  Minute of Meeting
Sent by:        "CESG" <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>

________________________________

Dear Margherita,

I see that you have made some additional edits to the Final_D_1 version of the MoM for the 5 Sept telecon.  I believe that these are not yet accurate, and since these minutes seem to be treated as the Gospel I think they need to reflect what actually occurred during the meeting.

Please see attached edits.  We did discuss these quite out of the norm processes, but we did not reach a conclusion as to how they were to be resolved.  I believe that we are in agreement that we shall continue to follow our written and agreed procedures, and that if we wish to change them we shall follow the process for doing that instead of just making up new ones procedures on the fly.

Thanks, Peter

From: CESG <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of "Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int" <Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int>
Date: Monday, October 1, 2018 at 7:05 AM
To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [CESG] CESG Telecon 5th September - Minute of Meeting

Dear All,
please find attached the Minute of Meeting from the CESG Telecon held on 5th September.
This file is also available on CWE at

https://cwe.ccsds.org/cesg/docs/CWE%20Private/Meetings/2018%20-%20Spring%20Meeting%20Gaithersburgh%2C%20MD%2C%20USA/CESG%20Meeting%2C%2016th%20April%202018/CESG%20Telecon%205th%20September%202018_Notes%20Final_D_1.docx

Kind regards,
Margherita

--------------------------------------------------------------
Margherita di Giulio

European Space Agency ESA/ESOC
Robert-Bosch-Str. 5
D-64293 Darmstadt - Germany
Tel: +49-6151-902779
e-mail: Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int

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).[attachment "CESG Telecon 5th September 2018_Notes Final_D_1-SEA.docx" deleted by Mario Merri/esoc/ESA]

_______________________________________________
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).

_______________________________________________
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/20181002/8be55d57/attachment.html>