[CESG] Results of Recent CESG Polls

Wed Sep 16 11:52:14 EDT 2026

CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2026-07-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 350.11-G-1, Secure Software Development Life Cycle for Space Systems (Green Book, Issue 1)

Results of CESG poll beginning 2026-07-28 and ending 2026-08-26:
Agency
Results
Conditions
SIS-AD
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY
SEA-AD
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY
SLS-DAD
APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS (state conditions that must be satisfied)

Roles of Quality Insurance and Software Test Engineer are both in the GB, but from the Quality Insurance side the following roles looks to miss:

* Identification of the applicable quality standard

* Control the Software Developpement Process to check that the quality requirements are met

* Control the Software Product Quality

Condition: the GB should add missing Quality Insurance roles

Another remark:

 Figure 4.2: is there any inversion "yes"-"no", from the "OK" box having a "Yes" arrow toward "Fix issue", and the "Tests passed and review OK ?" having a "No"   ?
Some other remarks (minor, not conditions):

Typo end of page 4-26: Containerization allows an application and all its dependencies, configurations, and Linux userland to be saved

Typo top of page 4-30:  the offending software is removed from the system

Top of Page 5-34 : CI/CD tools, such as Jenkins, Tekton [105][106], => could it be relevant to mention also Gitlab-CI/CD ?
CSS-AD
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY

Total Respondents: 4

Secretariat Interpretation of Results: Approved with Conditions
Proposed Secretariat Action: Publish Book once Conditions and CMC Approval are met

CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2026-07-003 Approval to publish CCSDS 142.0-B-2 Cor. 1, Technical Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 142.0-B-2, Issued March 2026

Results of CESG poll beginning 2026-07-28 and ending 2026-08-25:
Agency
Results
Conditions
SIS-AD
APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS (state conditions that must be satisfied)

Condition (for confirmation). The PICS now includes quite a few new entries: have these new entries been implicitly verified in the original interoperability testing plan?
SLS-DAD
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY
SEA-AD
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY
CSS-AD
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY

Comments only -- my assumption is that the making the IFS mandatory does not invalidate previous prototyping as even though optional it would have had to be tested for the blue book prior to this corrigendum.

Total Respondents: 4

Secretariat Interpretation of Results: Approved with Conditions
Proposed Secretariat Action: Publish Book once Conditions and CMC Approval are met

CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2026-07-001 Approval to release CCSDS 524.3-P-1.1, MO MAL Binding to HTTP Transport and XML Encoding

Results of CESG poll beginning 2026-07-17 and ending 2026-08-18:
Agency
Results
Conditions
SLS-AD
APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS (state conditions that must be satisfied)

Condition 1: The framework project was approved by CMC for minor changes in the frame of 5 year review, but the document introduces new MAL binding to HTTP and XML schema changes. This substantial change needs interoperability testing and validation of the XML schema definition.
SIS-AD
APPROVE UNCONDITIONALLY

My expectation is that the WG after the agency review will implement new interoperability testing since the modifications on Sections 3.5-3.8 affect the PICS appearing at the end of the document.
SEA-AD
APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS (state conditions that must be satisfied)

I'm fine with releasing for agency review - but the change does require some interoperability verification (which presumably will happen in parallel?)
CSS-AD
APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS (state conditions that must be satisfied)

1)    General suggestion (perhaps something for CCSDS to consider more in general).  This will be something of an “upgrade” from the previous CCSDS 524.3-B-1 (June 2018).  As such, I think it will be helpful to established implementations to indicate what is needed for moving to the what will be CCSDS 524.3-B-2.  For example, for this recommendation, I think the guidance could be something like;
a.    Header Parsing & Emitting: Update the header generation module to reflect X-MAL-Version-Number: 2 and run string fields through percent-encoding routines.
b.    Schema & Namespace Refresh: Regenerate XML schemas using major version 2 target namespaces (urn:ccsds:schema:mo:malxml:2:...) and update XML serialization models for explicit <Body> wrapping.
c.    Data Type Formatting: Re-align precision formatting for FineTime types to strictly support up to 9 decimal places.
Conditions:
1)    Minor formatting:
a.    The title page (Page 2) states July 2026.
b.    The Authority page (Page 3) lists May 2026 for Issue 1.1 and June 2026 in the bottom running header.
c.    Suggest usingt June 2026 (or other date) consistently through the documen
2)    Change FROM:  “The MAL header field ‘Supplements’ shall be assigned to zero or more HTTP header fields, each with name ‘X-MAL-Supplement’ “ TO: The MAL header field(s) ‘Supplement’ shall be assigned to zero or more HTTP header fields, each with name ‘X-MAL-Supplement’ “;  Rationale: X-MAL-Supplement is stated a single field which can be repeated – the field name is not defined as plural.
3)    Section 3.6.2.3 please check the statement “The version number ‘2’ shall be added to the SANA registry ‘MAL HTTP Binding Version Number’ and shall refer to the Mission Operations HTTP Transport and XML Encoding document CCSDS 524.3-B-1.”  Presumably this will be CCSDS 524.3-B-2, so this should probably not say “CCSDS 524.3-B-1”?
4)    Section B1.3.3 Please supply proper reference number for text that reads “…provide authentication information (reference)…
5)    Minor: WG call as to whether to fix or not: TOC, list of Figure lists Figure 4-1, and Figure 4-2 as being on pp B-3 and B-4 which is correct, but technically these would now be Figure B-1 and B-2 respectively.
6)    Page 2-5: how are items g) and h) different Interaction Patterns/Interaction Stages? They both say “PUBSUB – NOTIFY (broker to consumer)”.  Assume this is a duplicate line and delete or was there suppose to be some other semantic indication here?

Total Respondents: 4

Secretariat Interpretation of Results: Approved with Conditions
Proposed Secretariat Action: Setup review once Conditions and CMC Approval are met

If you have any questions or need support, please contact CCSDS Tech Support at
techsupport at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:techsupport at mailman.ccsds.org>.

Thanks,
CCSDS Tech Support
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20260916/9e2546d1/attachment-0001.htm>