[CMC] CMC 2007 January Draft Resolutions and Action Items

[Soula Jean-Marc]

Dear all,
 
as discussed during the meeting, the participation to the CCSDS WGs are already well defined in our procedures.
Companies that work on behalf and under funding of a member agency are considered as part of the agency contyribution ; on this category, I do agree with JFK that both Agency / Company names should be made visible on their badge.
The other category is defined as "associates" : companies who want to contribute on their own funds ; they are authorized to participate based on the acknowledgement given by the member agenccy of their choice (their country, their main partner, ...).
If not on behalf of an agency or associate of an agency, the companies cannot participate to the WGs and should seek to gain either one of the authorized status.
 
Best regards

Jean-Marc Soula 
CNES - DCT/OP/C-STA 
Advisor, GN Operations 
18 Avenue Edouard Belin 
31401 Toulouse Cedex 9 - France 
Tel.: +33 (0)5 61 2 74647 
Fax.: +33 (0)5 61 2 73135 
Email: Jean-Marc.Soula at cnes.fr 

	-----Message d'origine-----
	De : cmc-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:cmc-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] De la part de Jean-Francois.Kaufeler at esa.int
	Envoyé : mardi 6 février 2007 18:46
	À : Allan, PM (Peter)
	Cc : cmc-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org; CMC
	Objet : RE: [CMC] CMC 2007 January Draft Resolutions and Action Items
	
	

	Allan, and the others 
	I largely share Peter's view with some nuance: 
	Sponsoring means giving money. In the case of ESA we only sponsor (pay) those companies directly working for ESA on a support WP to CCSDS. 
	All other companies are welcome. Should we ask such companies to get through the burden of being acknowledged (more appropriate term than sponsored) by an Agency? Which Agency should they ask to be acknowledged from? Why only their country? I propose that it could be any Agency. 
	In the former case the badge would be: Agency/Company. 
	In the latter case: Company 
	Regards, JFK 
	
	
	
	
	
"Allan, PM (Peter)" <P.M.Allan at rl.ac.uk> 
Sent by: cmc-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org 

02/06/2007 06:14 PM 

To
Neil Dissinger <neild at aiaa.org>, CMC <cmc at mailman.ccsds.org> 
cc
Subject
RE: [CMC] CMC 2007 January Draft Resolutions and Action Items

	




	Neil,
	
	Resolution CMC-A-2006-01-05 states 
	
	  Add field in meeting registration database to designate sponsoring
	Agency
	
	The word "sponsoring" is causing a bit of friction in the BNSC area as
	some thought it would apply to them, which should not be the case.
	
	It is important to distinguish between those representing an agency,
	such as those actually employed by the agency (or in the case of the
	BNSC representatives, those formally representing the BNSC position even
	though they work for someone else), and outside bodies that may indeed
	be sponsored by an agency.
	
	Is the intention to have the current "agency or organisation" on the
	form, followed by "sponsoring agency" if the first field was not an
	agency. I checked how the BNSC contingency registered for the Winter
	2007 meetings and most people put BNSC / org_that_pays_my_salary, which
	seems ok to me.
	
	It just needs to be clear and to reflect the true situation.
	
	Cheers
	
	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 at rl.ac.uk
	
	_______________________________________________
	CMC mailing list
	CMC at mailman.ccsds.org
	http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cmc
	
	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc/attachments/20070207/f4e6de79/attachment.html