[Secretariat] [CMC] Re:: IOP-2 Agenda - CCSDS Presentation

[Kaneaki NARITA]

Dear Mike,

 

Thank you very much for the proposal.

I agree you proposed figure as part of CCSDS and CMC point of view.

However, Please let me introduce my idea on page 7 of IOP-2 presentation for
CCSDS. Not only this presentation, all of presentation's main purpose is
letting understands their on-going activity to IOP member from the IOAG
point of view. It is my rationale to use the page 7 chart with future
modification.

 

Again, I appreciate your suggestion.

Best Regards,

 

Narita

 

 

 

From: Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-NASA) [mailto:Mike.Kearney at nasa.gov] 
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:51 PM
To: Adrian J. Hooke; narita.kaneaki
Cc: CCSDS Management Council
Subject: RE: [Secretariat] [CMC] Re:: IOP-2 Agenda - CCSDS Presentation

 

I have been working on some proposed changes that I will send later today
that make the point more strongly that the CCSDS has a broader scope than
the IOAG.   However, for this specific point, I had previously developed the
attached slide.   

 

By addressing the output of CCSDS to "customers", CCSDS goes at the top of
the hierarchy, not the bottom.   It is implicit (it goes without saying)
that we take inputs (requirements) from those same customers.  But the more
critical point is what we provide and who we provide it to.  

 

Also, by listing the agencies participating in CCSDS, we make a strong point
that there are many more agencies than the IOAG/IOP agencies that
participate, and also that depend on CCSDS output.   

 

Narita, I will provide you this and other suggested updates later today (I
hope) in a more integrated fashion.  

 

   -=- Mike

 

Mike Kearney

NASA MSFC EO-01

256-544-2029

 

 

From: secretariat-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org
[mailto:secretariat-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Adrian J. Hooke
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:25 AM
To: narita.kaneaki
Cc: CCSDS Management Council
Subject: [Secretariat] [CMC] Re:: IOP-2 Agenda - CCSDS Presentation

 

At 07:44 AM 11/14/2008, narita.kaneaki wrote:

Based on his feedback, I found that there is inconsistency between page 5,
first bullet text and page 7 figure.(Draw direct solid line between IOAG and
GES, ISECG, ILN.)


Narita-san:  slide 7 seems to conflict with the consensus of the CMC that
was expressed in Berlin, i.e., that the CCSDS is an independent organization
that takes advice - but not direction - from the IOAG. Indeed, the very name
of the IOAG - "Advisory" - reflects this relationship; as does the fact that
not all CCSDS agencies are represented on the IOAG.

Maybe a more accurate picture might be something like the attached, which
recognizes that the CCSDS derives its requirements from many sources?

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/20081117/f8a06727/attachment.htm