[CMC] PAIMAS: an issue for CMC Resolution

[Adrian J. Hooke]

The CMC needs to decide whether to approve the "Producer Archive Ingest 
Methodology Abstract Standard" (PAIMAS) as a CCSDS Recommended Standard or 
a CCSDS Recommended PRACTICE at the CMC meeting starting on 24th May 2004. 
In deciding this issue, the CMC should consult Issue-2 of the CCSDS 
Restructuring document,"Restructured CCSDS Organization and Processes" 
(CCSDS A02.1-Y-2). This was published by the Secretariat (April 2004) and 
contains more some explicit guidelines for deciding whether a document 
should be a Standard or a Practice.

BACKGROUND:

1. Last December, the CESG was unable to reach consensus on whether this 
PAIMAS should be published as a CCSDS Recommended STANDARD (Blue Book) or a 
CCSDS Recommended PRACTICE (Magenta Book). This issue was therefore 
referred to the CMC:

-----------------
>>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:06:56 -0800
>>From: "Adrian J. Hooke" <Adrian.J.Hooke at jpl.nasa.gov>
>>Subject: [CESG] CESG RESOLUTION, CESG-03-016: PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE
>>METHODOLOGY
>>TO: SECRETARIAT
>>FROM: CESG CHAIR
>>SUBJECT: CESG RESOLUTION CESG-03-016: PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE METHODOLOGY
>>__________________________________________
>>CESG RESOLUTION, Tracking Number: CESG-03-016
>>
>>1. "The CESG recommends to the CMC that the MOIMS-DAI-WG document 
>>entitled 'Producer-Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard' 
>>(651x0b1-draft.pdf) should be published on the Standards Track and should 
>>be forwarded to ISO for balloting.
>>
>>2. HOWEVER, the CESG has been unable to reach consensus on which branch 
>>of the Standards Track this document should lie, i.e., whether it should 
>>be issued as a CCSDS Recommended Standard (Blue Book) or as a CCSDS Best 
>>Current Practice (Magenta Book). There is a minority body of opinion 
>>within the CESG that feels that, while the document has technical merit, 
>>it is insufficiently prescriptive to be a Recommended Standard. The CMC 
>>is therefore invited to decide whether this should be published as a Blue 
>>Book or a Magenta Book"
>>________________________________________________
>>
>>Part of the reason that there is a disagreement is that the CESG believes 
>>that there currently isn't a clear enough distinction between the 
>>objectives of a Recommended Standard and those of a Best Current 
>>Practice. Accordingly, the attached draft "Pink Sheets" to the 
>>Restructuring Plan have been created in order to highlight this issue and 
>>to suggest a way forward whereby the CMC might amend the definition of 
>>the CCSDS document hierarchy prior to making the decision on how to 
>>publish the 'Producer-Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard'.
>>
>>Please forward this Resolution CESG-03-016, along with the attached draft 
>>Restructuring "Pink Sheets" to the CCSDS Management Council, and notify 
>>the CESG when the CMC takes action.
------------------

2. However, the CMC voting last December was inconclusive and the document 
has been in limbo since that time. The Data Archive Ingest Working Group 
has submitted the following rationale for why the PAIMAS should become a 
Blue Book:
-- The DAI WG believes that it has met all the requirements. The two 
criteria specified in the CCSDS procedures manual, namely that comments 
have been properly handled and the appropriateness of 2 implementations is 
addressed satisfactorily.

-- The DAI WG has always believed (during the 2 years -2002 / 2003- 
development)that the PAIMAS document was on the CCSDS Recommended Standard 
track.

-- The DAI WG has completed all the steps for PAIMAS to become a CCSDS 
Recommended Standard.

-- The CMC and CESG have up until now, even under the new organization, at 
least implicitly recognized that the PAIMAS work item was on the "CCSDS 
Recommended Standard" track.

-- The CMC and CESG have previously distributed the PAIMAS document to all 
CCSDS Agencies and the general public for formal review to be a CCSDS 
Recommended Standard.

-- The CMC has directed CESG to "maintaining backward compatibility and of 
not perturbing the installed base at all stages of development, unless 
specifically approved by the CMC."

-- Even if CMC thinks CESG should be able to force track changes at the 
last minute, then the DAI WG believes that the PAIMAS work item still fits 
the criteria of a CCSDS Recommended Standard much better than it fits the 
criteria for a Recommended Practice.

3. In summary, there is no disagreement that the PAIMAS should be published 
on the Standards Track. The question is whether the document contains a 
sufficiently prescriptive set of requirements to be considered as a 
STANDARD, or whether it lacks a strong prescriptive flavor and would 
therefore be more correctly issued as a PRACTICE.

Best regards

Adrian J. Hooke
Chairman, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG)
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
Interplanetary Network Directorate
M/S 303-400, 4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, California 91109-8099, USA
+1.818.354.3063 OFFICE
+1.818.653.9553 MOBILE
+1 818.393.2606 FAX
http://www.ccsds.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc/attachments/20040510/71ae41b3/attachment.html