[CMC] Re: A pondering.
Eduardo W. Bergamini
e.w.bergamini at uol.com.br
Tue Nov 18 08:49:35 EST 2008
Mike,
Thank you for your message. I agree with your comments, which also included
the opportune mentioning of the ISO domain. A much broader community in this
case, as we do know it.
Departing from the fundamental assertion ...
"Affordable cross support will not be attained if it is not preceded by interoperable
resources."
... and based on the the many concrete and undeniable examples that History
provides us with that, to the extent that a common objective exists among
different entities and, to the extent their coordinated, value adding joint effort
inequivocably seek that same objective, in a realistic and sensible fashion, it is
a natural result that the objective will be attained in due time. I do understand
and hope that CCSDS is one of those entities, in our case.
With my best regards,
Eduardo
INPE/CCSDS
_________________________________________________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-NASA)
To: Eduardo W. Bergamini
Cc: cmc at mailman.ccsds.org ; Adrian J. Hooke ; Marco Antonio Chamon
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:01 AM
Subject: RE: A pondering.
Eduardo: Thank you for your message, especially the last part of your third paragraph.
We all know that affordable cross-support can be hardly attained, if any, to the extent it is not preceeded
by interoperable resources, independently of policies, personal preferences and influences. Not to mention politics, by itself.
I would simplify that to "Affordable cross support will not be attained if it is not preceded by interoperable resources." A very crystal-clear and succinct statement of the mission and impact of CCSDS. I hope you don't mind if I use it.
I too have hopes that increasing cooperation with the IOP community (including the IOAG) will foster the dream of worldwide (actually solar system wide) interoperability. However, as you saw in my earlier note, while I recognize the IOAG as a *very* important customer, perhaps the *most* important *single* customer, CCSDS also answers to other customers as well. Primarily the CCSDS agencies that participate, but ISO and perhaps other multi-agency forums as well. In any case, I think CCSDS should keep their options open in that regard.
-=- Mike
Mike Kearney
NASA MSFC EO-01
256-544-2029
From: Eduardo W. Bergamini [mailto:e.w.bergamini at uol.com.br]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 9:10 PM
To: Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-NASA)
Cc: cmc at mailman.ccsds.org; Adrian J. Hooke; Marco Antonio Chamon
Subject: A pondering.
Dear Mike,
I am naturally following the long series of correspondence on the CCSDS
related preparation of a presentation for the coming IOP-2 event. It made
me recall a series of events that led to the current situation we can observe.
For instance, it is vivid in my memory the many discussions we had during
and after that first "joint" CCSDS/CMC-IOAG meeting that was held in CNES
a few years ago, in that same room (Poincaré building) where the SpaceOps
series of meetings were held, in Toulouse, last month. That "joint"
CCSDS/CMC-IOAG meeting, as I still understand it, continues to be an
important one because it paved the way for a common, although evolving,
understanding and for a joint action between the two entities. Which I could
consistently observe, in recent years, under a healthy initiative, from my
(limited, because INPE is not an IOAG member, so far) point of view.
However, reading the recent correspondence which I mentioned in the first
paragraph, I must admit that some of the principles that have been guiding
our CMC interaction, fundamented by those initial CMC resolutions, seem to
be somewhat faded in our current context. I feel that it is probably time for
the CMC bring the theme back up to discussion in its coming meeting for a
review and for an update of the CMC consensus which was reached in the
beginning, in respect to the CCSDS relationship to IOAG. I mention it not only
for the sake of consistency with our memory but also due to an evident need
we have to rediscuss the subject, possibly, on grounds of probable new
approachs that may be simply required for consideration, in view of the natural
sequence of events. It is, for instance, very firm in my memory that, at no
moment so far, there was a consensus in CCSDS CMC on a formal hierarchy
between CCSDS and IOAG. At the same time, it is also clear to me, since the
beginning, that the relationship between CCSDS and IOAG has been a most
fortunate evolution in the process of those concerned, in the many levels of
the pertinent authority of the community, with the very basic paradigm of
interoperability. Not to mention, cross-support. We all know that affordable
cross-support can be hardly attained, if any, to the extent it is not preceeded
by interoperable resources, independently of policies, personal preferences
and influences. Not to mention politics, by itself.
If CCSDS access to IOP-2 is being materialized under support by IOAG
community, in principle, this is not contradictory, as a result from the good
willing that we certainly observe among some of our colleagues which are part
of both communities. I would dream, why not ? Of CCSDS joining, as viable,
efforts in concert with IOAG and IOP for the benefit of worldwide interoperability
and cross-support. Who can pay for less than that ? I am sure that there are
ways, be it, long or not so long, to get to this type of association. However,
at the same time, under the actual terms that CCSDS is governed by, since its
creation, in principle, I would not see any impedement that may preclude CCSDS
from reaching the IOP community, even if this may result from a formal request
to that forum. To the best of my acquaintance, I would understand that the
sovereignity of CCSDS, inclusive in this respect, is being preserved to this point
in time, under the existing terms based on its original constitution. It is very vivid
in my mind the principle of equal opportunity to its members that motivated the
creation of CCSDS since its very beginning. We did come a long way, under this
very principle, with outstanding realizations of the CCSDS community, I do believe,
with only minor disturbances. Let us hope that it will be kept this way. This does
not mean, at all, that updates to the CCSDS process are not required. Constantly.
I understand that this has been faced as part of a must of the CCSDS business,
in a best possible way.
Thank you for your attention to my pondering, on the above subject.
With my best regards,
Eduardo
INPE/CCSDS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc/attachments/20081118/c1a88f26/attachment.htm
More information about the CMC
mailing list