[CMC] Re: Repository Audit and Certification Working Group

[Adrian J. Hooke]

At 06:51 AM 4/21/2008, Nestor.Peccia at esa.int wrote:
>Dear David,
>I suggest that you prepare a consolidated output addressing all the raised
>comments and concerns (e.g. conceptual paper, Charter update, resources,
>schedule). I will then send it to the CMC

Nestor: the critical question that you seem to 
have avoided is: "why is this work appropriate to 
be performed by CCSDS?" All new work should be 
related to the CCSDS Charter, which is quite 
heavily driven by interoperability concerns:
http://public.ccsds.org/about/charter.aspx

While it was quite natural that early work in the 
standardization of digital repositories 
(archives) should have been undertaken by the 
space agencies - who faced the digital archiving 
problem long before many other communities - it 
is not clear that the world has not moved on to 
the point where another standardization forum might be more appropriate.

Take as an example the Delay Tolerant Networking 
Research Group in the Internet Research Task 
Force (IRTF) - where a technology that originated 
from the space sector is now being developed by a much wider community:
http://www.dtnrg.org

In the case of DTN, we are quite happy to let the 
broader community hammer away at the technology 
and the standards. While we have the goal of 
eventually creating a "space profile" of DTN back 
in CCSDS (which is interoperable with the larger 
community), in the meantime we are not consuming 
scarce CCSDS resources. Why isn't this model now 
appropriate for digital data archiving? In short, 
why does CCSDS continue to carry the load for a 
community that is well able to shoulder its own burden?

This is quite a serious matter. We now have 23 
active Working Groups and 9 BOFs. Each new 
Working Group slices the resources pie even 
thinner and creates an additional load on the 
Secretariat and meeting hosting. We need to be 
quite sure, before forming new groups, that CCSDS 
is the only forum in which the work can progress.

Best regards
Adrian

Adrian J. Hooke
Chairman, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG)
NASA Headquarters
Space Communications and Navigation Office, 7L70
Space Operations Mission Directorate

>=====================================================================
>
>CCSDS Management Council (CMC) Polling
>Authorization to create the Digital Repository Audit and Certification
>Working Group
>
>The Mission Operations and Information Management Services Area (MOIMS),
>
>  CONSIDERING that
>  - Many CCSDS member agencies and other organizations are currently producing
>digitally encoded information at an increasing rate, and that
>- These collections are held in a number of digital repositories (archives),
>and that
>- So far there have been no independent criteria to objectively judge whether
>or not any of these archives have been adequately protecting their digital
>holdings, and in particular whether the information in those
>holdings will remain understandable and usable by their Designated
>Communities in the future, and
>
>RECOGNIZING THAT
>- there is a demand for a standard against which Repositories of digital
>information may be audited and on which an international accreditation and
>certification process may be based,
>
>RESOLVES that a digital Repository Audit and Certification Working Group be
>formed in
>accordance with the attached charter.
>=============================================
>ASI Bruca Loredana ADOPT
>
>BNSC Allan Peter ADOPT PROVISIONALLY (i.e., if stated condition is satisfied)
>I originally voted to directly accept this, but I have no problem with Mike's
>provisos.
>
>CNES Soula Jean-Marc ADOPT
>
>CSA Hartman Leo ADOPT PROVISIONALLY (i.e., if stated condition is satisfied)
>I agree that the changes to the charter that Mike suggested should be carried
>out.
>
>I think it's very important work and it was very insightful on the part of
>CCSDS to invest in the area but concerns about appropriate mandate seem hard
>to avoid. I think it would be prudent for the sake of the contribution to
>date and of the OAIS community that we consider extending the charter to
>include the effort of finding a new home in ISO for OAIS related work.
>
>DLR Pilgram Martin ADOPT PROVISIONALLY (i.e., if stated condition is
>satisfied) Producing Books for auditing and certification should include a
>concept, who is doing both after the generation of the books. Can that be
>done from the owner of the archive, or are the WG planning to be the auditing
>and certification group afterwards?
>
>ESA Kaufeler Jean-Francois ADOPT
>
>FSA Secretariat Proxy ADOPT
>
>INPE Bergamini Eduardo ADOPT PROVISIONALLY (i.e., if stated condition is
>satisfied) This is an "ADOPT" vote. However, it is opportune to express that
>the comments attached to the other votes, so far, express views that are
>pertinent to the context. Digital Repository Audit and Certification
>procedures are a natural complement to the already existing, fundamental OAIS
>concept. Which is also a subject of interest of ISO, already transformed in a
>standard (ISO 14721), in its domain. To the extent CCSDS only originated
>resources may be critical, it is being pondered why not consider a joint,
>liaison work with a possibly existing, appropriately selected ISO TC/WG, for
>the development of the subject which is under proposal by the charter ? It
>could, concurrently, possibly become a CCSDS Magenta Recommendation and an
>ISO Standard, as well. It is worth to remind that "Goal 1" of the proposed
>CCSDS WG is also expected to become, in advance, a requirement criteria for
>compliance by an ISO Trusted Digital Repository which, in its turn, is
>another standard, yet to be probably developed by ISO, as it is being
>expressed by the charter.
>
>JAXA Junjiro Nakahara ADOPT
>
>NASA Kearney Mike ADOPT PROVISIONALLY (i.e., if stated condition is
>satisfied) For the sake of expedient formation of a working group, I am
>voting "adopt provisionally" and stating the following provisions:
>
>Based on conversations with the Area Director, the red book identified is
>destined to become a magenta book, and the resources listed are incomplete
>(missing reviewer manpower and magenta book production).  Therefore the
>charter must be updated to reflect all of the manpower that the agencies are
>expected to commit, and the schedule must reflect the production of a magenta
>book.  Also the usual concept paper is not being produced because of "other
>material" that is already available between the more than 100 associates in
>the wiki and mailing-list. The charter should at least have some statements
>that reflect where this other material is, to support the CMC evaluation of
>the concept of the working group.
>
>Other agencies should consider whether these changes are appropriate to be
>fixed with "adopt provisionally" or if they are too extensive to warrant this
>approach.
>
>Additionally NASA needs to reiterate that NASA funding doesn’t support this,
>and NASA has a general concern that this effort expends resources (including
>Secretariat, etc.) for work that is not squarely in the space data systems
>domain.   However, we don’t currently object to other agencies working these
>topics in CCSDS.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc/attachments/20080421/301b72c1/attachment.htm