[CESG] Reassess the production steps of the Yellow Books : [EXTERNAL] Fw: [Cesg-all] New CESG Polls

Thu Feb 13 19:33:40 UTC 2020

Thanks Gippo,

If I read your intent you agree that we should continue the current polling, according to the guidelines, and that you are not asking for an extension.

Thanks.

I look forward to your PIDs, should there be any.

Thanks, Peter

From: CESG <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>
Date: Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 7:13 AM
To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [CESG] Reassess the production steps of the Yellow Books : [EXTERNAL] Fw: [Cesg-all] New CESG Polls

Peter,
        for the ongoing polls (that are not affected by Margherita's proposal as far I understand from  her mail) I would be against an 'a priori" extension of the review period.
In other words, let's see if anybody does such a request.
I would only recommend everybody giving input via PIDs (for this and for all polls) such that the most correct interaction can be held.

I am not sure it is allowed to not allow ABSTAIN as vote :o)
If allowed the result could be in somebody not voting.
BTW, I do not plan to vote ABSTAIN.

For the rest I am open to listen to Margherita's considerations with respect to the (future) production steps of the Yellow Books.

Best regards

Gian Paolo

From:        "Shames, Peter M\(US 312B\) via CESG" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
To:        "Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int" <Margherita.di.Giulio at esa.int>, "cesg at mailman.ccsds.org" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Date:        12-02-20 17:35
Subject:        Re: [CESG] [EXTERNAL]  Fw: [Cesg-all] New CESG Polls
Sent by:        "CESG" <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>
________________________________

[attachment "d01-SANA-SSG-Report-to-CMC Fall 2019v1.pptx" deleted by Gian Paolo Calzolari/esoc/ESA]
[attachment "SANA-SSG Issues & Proposal 13Nov19.pptx" deleted by Gian Paolo Calzolari/esoc/ESA]

Dear Margherita,

I must admit to being a little puzzled by your comments, but I agree that this is worthy of discussion.  That said, I really do not want to see these edits to the Yellow Books significantly delayed because they are intended to clarify procedures for the WG and to remove ambiguities.  The longer we delay cleaning this up the more work we make for the WG and the CESG.

in the CCSDS Org & Proc doc, A02x1y4c2, the process for this sort of Administrative Track document that is normative upon CCSDS is quite clear:

6.1.6 ADMINISTRATIVE TRACK
The Administrative Track consists of the following: – CCSDS Record (Yellow Book).
…
Yellow Books may also be used to document CCSDS internal processes, procedures, and controlling guidelines. This document is itself a CCSDS Yellow Book, and it is a controlling document describing CCSDS procedures. Any CCSDS Yellow Book that is normative upon CCSDS itself requires CESG and CMC approval polling.

The issues that we have had with the ambiguities were brought up in the CESG meeting as part of the SEA overall report, (see attached d01-SANA-SSG).  There was a separate SANA Issues presentation to the CESG that addressed in more detail the issues and the specific changes that were in discussion (see attached "SANA-SSG-Issues & Proposal").  The CESG had some comments and they were addressed in the version of the materials I attached here.  These documents were prepared by the SEA SAWG and were reviewed within the SANA Steering Group (SSG) which includes SANA, Secretariat, and CESG members from several agencies.  Several working telecons were held with the SSG, Secretariat, and the SANA Operator to make sure that the actual process and steps was properly described so that Working groups would have no ambiguities to wrestle with.

I believe that the normal course of approval for such Administrative Track documents that are normative on CCSDS is the one that we are on.  This is what we followed for the original versions of these documents and I can see no reason why these updates should not follow the same documented process.   These Yellow Books are supposed to be reviewed and approved, or not, by the CESG, and then concurred, or not, by the CMC.

That said, I do agree that there are a number of documents in the review queue, all of which properly require the attention of the CESG.  I suggest the following approach, at least for these:

1.        That the review period, at least for these documents, can be extended by a week.

2.        That a vote of "Abstain, does not affect my area" not be allowed.  Every Area that uses registries will be affected by these.

I do not think that it will be helpful, nor a contribution to the smooth workings of the CCSDS, to delay this until the Spring meeting.

Very best regards, 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: Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 7:19 AM
To: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [CESG] Fw: [Cesg-all] New CESG Polls

Dear Peter, dear  CESG colleagues,

looking at the (attached) list of Polls, I noticed the number of Yellow Books that are in the publication poll, that is,  they have reached their final stage.
I was reflecting on the fact that for Yellow Books - those YB belonging to the administrative track -  the normal practises foreseen for the other books are not required. Namely, it is not required to::
- create a draft project
- have it approved by the CMC
- run the  Agency Review of the draft document

This means, that the Yellow Books only become (formally) "visible" when they are ready for publication (or equivalently, when the ADs issues the relevant resolution).

Given the increasing importance-  and number ! - of the Yellow Books, and acknowledging their key role in governing the CCSDS practises, I would  like to reassess the production steps of the Yellow Books
I mean that, there should be a  sort of milestone,  where assessment/review gets requested. This could involve, for instance,  the ADs.
(If I remember well, this was informally done only when the Org & Proc book was  established.).
For  YB  all we have today is that  some sort of assessment can only be done during the polling process by the ADs ( by issuing PIDs). However this can't be considered  a mean to review  the  document.

I will bring this point to discussion, either at the next Telecon, or at the Spring Meeting.
Meanwhile, please let me know  if you have comments or proposals,
Kind regard,
Margherita

--------------------------------------------------------------
Margherita di Giulio
Ground Station Systems Division
Backend Software Section (OPS-GSB)

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

----- Forwarded by Margherita di Giulio/esoc/ESA on 12/02/2020 10:51 -----

From:        "CCSDS Secretariat" <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
To:        cesg at mailman.ccsds.org
Cc:        cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org
Date:        05/02/2020 00:48
Subject:        [Cesg-all] New CESG Polls
Sent by:        "CESG-All" <cesg-all-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>

________________________________

Dear CESG Members,

Seven new CESG polls have been posted to the CWE:

- CESG-P-2020-02-001 Approval to publish CCSDS
313.0-Y-3, Space Assigned Numbers Authority
(SANA)—Role, Responsibilities, Policies, and Procedures Yellow Book, Issue 3)
- CESG-P-2020-02-002 Approval to publish CCSDS
313.1-Y-2, CCSDS SANA Registry Management Policy Yellow Book, Issue 2)
- CESG-P-2020-02-003 Approval to publish CCSDS
313.2-Y-2, Procedures for SANA Registry Specification Yellow Book, Issue 2)
- CESG-P-2020-02-004 Approval to publish CCSDS
315.1-Y-1, CCSDS URN Namespace Policy (Yellow Book, Issue 1)
- CESG-P-2020-02-005 Approval to publish CCSDS
500.2-G-2, Navigation Data Messages Overview (Green Book, Issue 2)
- CESG-P-2020-02-006 Approval to publish CCSDS
920.0-G-1, Cross Support Transfer Service
Specification Framework Concept (Green Book, Issue 1)
- CESG-P-2020-02-007 Approval to publish CCSDS
660.2-G-2, XML Telemetric and Command Exchange (XTCE) (Green Book, Issue 2)

These polls can be accessed via the following link:

https://public.ccsds.org/polls/SitePages/CESG%20Open%20Polls.aspx

The closure date for these polls is 18 February 2020

NOTE TO CC RECIPIENTS:  Only Area Directors and
Deputy Area Directors vote on CESG polls.
_______________________________________________
CESG-All mailing list
CESG-All at mailman.ccsds.org
https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cesg-all

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/20200213/17e556de/attachment-0001.htm>