[CMC] Re: [CESG] Draft-3 CCSDS report to IOAG-11

[Adrian J. Hooke]

At 12:25 AM 6/12/2007, Chris.Taylor at esa.int wrote:
>Adrian, I see that the option to multiplex IP using HDLC as a 
>private bit stream is still in the list. I thought we had killed 
>this one with the response to the recent review where quite a few 
>Agencies were strongly against it. It therefore seems incorrect to 
>give it any sort of credibility as a x-support option to be 
>considered by the IOAG.

Chris: reports of its death are greatly exaggerated. Use of Virtual 
Channel Access (VCA) and Bitstream service is perfectly legal in the 
AOS specification, and for whatever reason the Constellation program 
has elected to use that legal option in the standard. Whether or not 
it's a good *idea* to use those options it is another matter: but 
that's an operational decision about what standard features of AOS 
will be cross supported and what won't - and that decision should be 
made by the IOAG agencies.

>  I think this should first be resolved within CCSDS before exposing 
> it outside and would recommend it's removal.

The only way to remove it from the AOS standard is to modify the 
CCSDS Blue Book. That means forming a BOF, re-starting a WG and 
processing Pink Sheets. And in the process you might be removing 
capabilities that actually have utility, if properly and honestly applied.

Alternatively, we could - in conjunction with the IOAG - form a joint 
CCSDS-IOAG Working Group to come up with a Recommended Practice 
(Magenta Book) that specifically states the recommended 
architecture,  protocol suite and evolutionary strategy for moving 
towards a future era of Space Internetworking. In fact, we have the 
nucleus of that in the current CCSDS Cislunar Space Internetworking 
WG, which is stalled on this same issue.  Cislunar, as currently 
constituted, is very poorly supported by any Agency other than NASA - 
although it does enjoy strong support from the very people who made 
the Constellation decision, as well as from your local U.K. 
representative from Cisco/Surrey Space Technology (who seems to have 
his own agenda that's different from the European agencies).

My recommendation is to remove the work 'Cislunar' from its title and 
to re-charter it as the 'CCSDS Space Internetworking Working Group'. 
Instead of focusing on just the Earth-Moon communications 
environment, it would in fact expand to cover the whole domain of 
space internetworking and it would "work backwards from Mars" to come 
up with a Recommended Practice that covers the whole problem space. 
It would be properly staffed by nominated personnel representing the 
senior CCSDS Agencies and would contain appointed  representatives 
from the IOAG network operators.  "Visitors" to the working group 
would be treated as such: their inputs would be listened to and 
respected, but they would not be voting members.

I'd like to get the reaction of the CESG and the CMC to this 
proposal. Obviously, there is going to be extensive discussion about 
the "IP-in-Space" topic at next week's IOAG meeting. We then have a 
CMC meeting in Brussels the following week to "catch" the results. If 
CCSDS would like to propose this new Working Group strategy, then I 
have it on good authority that NASA will be willing to supply the 
necessary resources to lead it. We could then get moving on the work 
over the Summer, leading up to the Fall CCSDS meeting.

Best regards
Adrian

Adrian J. Hooke
Chairman, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc/attachments/20070612/62c6524d/attachment.htm