[CMC] Question re: recent CMC voting
Allan, PM (Peter)
P.M.Allan@rl.ac.uk
Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:17:27 -0000
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C3D542.1FB1714A
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Adrian,
I did not understand your e-mail. When you say something has been approved,
do you mean that 100% of those who voted approved? Otherwise how can
something be approved if there was not a quorum?
On MC-E03-14, why do you say there is no consensus? 100% of the votes were
cast for the Blue Book option. Admittedly it is not quorate, but that is no
different to the other polls.
I fear that the root cause of the shortage of votes is that the announcement
of the poll came out shortly before the Christmas holiday. Although I voted,
it was a rush as I only had about 3 working days to consult people. RAL
shuts down for a week and a half, and many people take a fortnight off.
Happy New Year
Peter
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Peter M. Allan
Head, Space Data Division
Space Science and Technology Department
CCLRC/Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Chilton
Didcot Tel: +44 (1235) 445723
Oxon OX11 0QX fax: +44 (1235) 446667
England e-mail: p.m.allan@rl.ac.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian J. Hooke [mailto:adrian.j.hooke@jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: 07 January 2004 16:15
To: CCSDS Management Council
Subject: [CMC] Question re: recent CMC voting
Dear CMC Members:
In the absence of the Secretariat, I have been checking the CMC Polls page
http://www.ccsds.org/CCSDS/Poll <http://www.ccsds.org/CCSDS/Poll> myself to
see what has happened to recent actions that were recommended for CMC action
by the CESG.
As far as I can tell the situation is as listed below. It would appear that
although all four polls seem to lack an appropriate quorum of votes from
senior Member Agencies:
a) MC-E03-11/12 have been approved,
b) MC-E03-13 has been approved pending ratifiaction by CNES,
c) No consensus has been reached on MC-E03-14 and therefore it has been
rejected and will require further CMC deliberation.
Is this in fact the will of the CMC?
Best regards
Adrian J. Hooke
Chairman, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MC-E03-11 The CCSDS resolves to approve the CESG-proposed changes to
Proposal for Restructuring the CCSDS Organization and Processes (CCSDS
A02.1-Y-1), as specified in the draft, d2Pink1-Restruct-15Dec031, and to
reissue the document, with changes incorporated, as an issue-2 CCSDS Record
(Yellow Book).
Agree 5 100.00%
MDrexler on 2003-12-18
EBergamini on 2003-12-19
PAllan on 2003-12-22
RNagashima on 2003-12-25
GCampan on 2003-12-30
Disagree 0 0.00%
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MC-E03-12 The CCSDS resolves to approve an additional Red Book review of
Orbit Data Messages (CCSDS 502.0-R-3). This resolution supersedes
resolutions MC-F02-06 and MC-F02-09, which, respectively, authorized
issuance of the document as a Blue Book and directed former subpanel P1J to
"utilize PVL, or preferably XML" in the published document.
Agree 5 100.00%
MDrexler on 2003-12-18
EBergamini on 2003-12-19
PAllan on 2003-12-22
RNagashima on 2003-12-25
GCampan on 2003-12-30
Disagree 0 0.00%
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MC-E03-13 The CCSDS resolves to approve the following addition to the
recommendations contained in the Radio Frequency and Modulation Blue Book
(CCSDS 401-B): 2.2.8 Suppressed Carrier Telecommand Systems
Agree 4 80.00%
MDrexler on 2003-12-18
EBergamini on 2003-12-19
PAllan on 2003-12-22
RNagashima on 2003-12-25
Disagree 1 20.00% GCampan on 2003-12-30
Not really "disagree" but request time to check with our expert not
available at this time. Answer expected by 9 January 2004
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MC-E03-14 The CCSDS resolves to approve release of Producer-Archive
Interface Methodology Abstract Standard (CCSDS 651.0) as an issue-1
[Blue/Magenta]* Book. The Secretariat is requested to make arrangements for
publication. *The resolution, if approved, will specify either Blue or
Magenta.
Approve publication as Blue Book 5 85.00%
MDrexler on 2003-12-18
A book, once on the standadrs track, cannot and must not be moved to the
practices track. From the white paper status on it must stay on its track.
On the fly changes would mean that the CMC did a wrong decision on the white
book level already, which cannot be the case!!! See CCSDS A02.1-Y-1 pink
sheet page 6.
EBergamini on 2003-12-19
Consistency with original plan is being preserved.
PAllan on 2003-12-22
RNagashima on 2003-12-25
GCampan on 2003-12-30
Approve publication as Magenta Book 1 15.00%
Hartman, Leo (off-poll communication to T. Gannett. Comment: I think the
minimum criterion for a standard is that
the CESG unanimously agrees that it should be one.)
Disapprove 0 0.00%
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
------_=_NextPart_001_01C3D542.1FB1714A
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2>Adrian,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>I did=20
not understand your e-mail. When you say something has been approved, =
do you=20
mean that 100% of those who voted approved? Otherwise how can something =
be=20
approved if there was not a quorum?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>On=20
MC-E03-14, why do you say there is no consensus? 100% of the votes were =
cast for=20
the Blue Book option. Admittedly it is not quorate, but that is no =
different to=20
the other polls.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>I fear=20
that the root cause of the shortage of votes is that the =
announcement of=20
the poll came out shortly before the Christmas holiday. Although I =
voted, it was=20
a rush as I only had about 3 working days to consult people. RAL shuts =
down for=20
a week and a half, and many people take a fortnight =
off.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Happy=20
New Year</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2>Peter</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D112551017-07012004>
<P><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>---------------------------------------------------------------=
--------</FONT>=20
<BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dr. Peter M. Allan</FONT> <BR><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Head, Space Data Division</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Space=20
Science and Technology Department</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>CCLRC/Rutherford Appleton Laboratory</FONT> <BR><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Chilton</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Didcot &nb=
sp; &nb=
sp; &nb=
sp;=20
Tel: +44 (1235) 445723</FONT> <BR><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Oxon OX11=20
0QX &nb=
sp; &nb=
sp; =20
fax: +44 (1235) 446667</FONT> <BR><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>England &n=
bsp; &n=
bsp; =20
e-mail: p.m.allan@rl.ac.uk</FONT> </P></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Adrian J. Hooke=20
[mailto:adrian.j.hooke@jpl.nasa.gov]<BR><B>Sent:</B> 07 January 2004=20
16:15<BR><B>To:</B> CCSDS Management Council<BR><B>Subject:</B> [CMC] =
Question=20
re: recent CMC voting<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Dear CMC Members:<BR><BR>In =
the=20
absence of the Secretariat, I have been checking the CMC Polls page =
<A=20
href=3D"http://www.ccsds.org/CCSDS/Poll"=20
eudora=3D"autourl">http://www.ccsds.org/CCSDS/Poll</A> myself to see =
what has=20
happened to recent actions that were recommended for CMC action by =
the CESG.=20
<BR><BR>As far as I can tell the situation is as listed below. It =
would appear=20
that <U>although all four polls seem to lack an appropriate quorum of =
votes=20
from senior Member Agencies</U>:<BR><BR>a) MC-E03-11/12 have been =
approved,=20
<BR>b) MC-E03-13 has been approved pending ratifiaction by =
CNES, <BR>c)=20
No consensus has been reached on MC-E03-14 and therefore it has been =
rejected=20
and will require further CMC deliberation.<BR><BR>Is this in fact the =
will of=20
the CMC?<BR><BR>Best regards<BR>Adrian J. Hooke<BR>Chairman, CCSDS =
Engineering=20
Steering Group=20
(CESG)<BR><BR>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>MC-E03-11 The =
CCSDS=20
resolves to approve the CESG-proposed changes to Proposal for =
Restructuring=20
the CCSDS Organization and Processes (CCSDS A02.1-Y-1), as specified =
in the=20
draft, d2Pink1-Restruct-15Dec031, and to reissue the document, with =
changes=20
incorporated, as an issue-2 CCSDS Record (Yellow=20
Book).<BR><BR>Agree 5 =20
100.00% <BR>MDrexler on 2003-12-18<BR>EBergamini on =
2003-12-19<BR>PAllan on 2003-12-22<BR>RNagashima on =
2003-12-25<BR>GCampan on=20
2003-12-30<BR><BR>Disagree 0=20
0.00%<BR>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>MC-E03-12 The =
CCSDS=20
resolves to approve an additional Red Book review of Orbit Data =
Messages=20
(CCSDS 502.0-R-3). This resolution supersedes resolutions MC-F02-06 =
and=20
MC-F02-09, which, respectively, authorized issuance of the document =
as a Blue=20
Book and directed former subpanel P1J to "utilize PVL, or preferably =
XML" in=20
the published document.<BR><BR>Agree =
5 =20
100.00% <BR>MDrexler on 2003-12-18<BR>EBergamini on =
2003-12-19<BR>PAllan=20
on 2003-12-22<BR>RNagashima on 2003-12-25<BR>GCampan on=20
2003-12-30<BR><BR>Disagree 0=20
0.00%<BR>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>MC-E03-13 The =
CCSDS=20
resolves to approve the following addition to the recommendations =
contained in=20
the Radio Frequency and Modulation Blue Book (CCSDS 401-B): 2.2.8 =
Suppressed=20
Carrier Telecommand Systems<BR><BR>Agree =
4 =20
80.00% <BR>MDrexler on 2003-12-18<BR>EBergamini on=20
2003-12-19<BR>PAllan on 2003-12-22<BR>RNagashima on =
2003-12-25<BR><BR>Disagree=20
1 20.00% GCampan on 2003-12-30<BR>Not really "disagree" but request =
time to=20
check with our expert not available at this time. Answer expected by =
9 January=20
2004<BR>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>MC-E03-14 The =
CCSDS=20
resolves to approve release of Producer-Archive Interface Methodology =
Abstract=20
Standard (CCSDS 651.0) as an issue-1 [Blue/Magenta]* Book. The =
Secretariat is=20
requested to make arrangements for publication. *The resolution, if =
approved,=20
will specify either Blue or Magenta.<BR><BR>Approve publication as =
Blue=20
Book 5 85.00% =20
<BR>MDrexler on 2003-12-18<BR>A book, once on the standadrs track, =
cannot and=20
must not be moved to the practices track. From the white paper status =
on it=20
must stay on its track. On the fly changes would mean that the CMC =
did a wrong=20
decision on the white book level already, which cannot be the case!!! =
See=20
CCSDS A02.1-Y-1 pink sheet page 6.<BR>EBergamini on =
2003-12-19<BR>Consistency=20
with original plan is being preserved.<BR>PAllan on =
2003-12-22<BR>RNagashima=20
on 2003-12-25<BR>GCampan on 2003-12-30<BR><BR>Approve publication as =
Magenta=20
Book 1 15.00% <BR>Hartman, Leo (off-poll =
communication to T.=20
Gannett. Comment: I think the minimum criterion for a standard is =
that<BR>the=20
CESG unanimously agrees that it should be one.)<BR><BR>Disapprove 0 =
0.00%=20
=
<BR>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></H=
TML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C3D542.1FB1714A--