[CESG] General comment and question on the new TM Sync and Coding blue book (131-B-6)

[Lux, Jim (US 430E)]

I approved, but I have a question..
One thing that got changed is that now a randomizer is required (it's a shall).  Does this make an existing implementation without a randomizer now "non-conformant" by definition?
Let's say someone has a "product" (mission, software, a box, whatever) that advertises "Coding is implemented in conformance with CCSDS 131.0-B-5" ... Are consumers of the product smart enough to go look and see if there's a new issue (-6)?  What if they say "CCSDS compliant coding" with no specification number or issue. This is super common, in my experience, and experience says "better go check the details".  But with the recent influx of new people doing spaceflight stuff, what's the implications of that - (Other than hiring me or someone like me with experience as a consultant to help them not step into the tarpit).

[JPL logo]
James Lux
Data Standards Program Manager
4200 Telecom Programs and Oversight
JPL
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, CA 91109
M: 818.395.2714
O: 818.354.2075
jimlux at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:jimlux at jpl.nasa.gov>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20260303/34fb67c5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2081 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20260303/34fb67c5/attachment.png>