[CMC E-Poll Alert] Re: Re: Action Required - CMC Review of Proposed Change to the CCSDS Charter

[Eduardo Bergamini]

Adrian,

Thank you for your attention. In response:

1)I remember that the very first agreement we had in a CMC meeting, when we
did decide to effectively go forward with the re-structuring of CCSDS (in
Arlington, if I remember it) a solid argument that was decisive for justifying
the basic background that fundamented the proposed structure was that the
"information" and "communication" topics were being clearly addressed in the
new approach for the structure. Therefore, obeying the main streams of the
technology we are relying on. For instance, I do remember Jean-François(K.)by
my side, arguing exactly in that direction which, surely, we all agreed upon,
at the occasion. As expected, it is just a matter of observing the new CCSDS
structure and both topics are, in fact crearly represented, solidly as we can
devise it, I believe. In fact, whatever specific topic we may address in the
current structure of CCSDS, we can identify at least one of both topics in its
backgroung. Just that;

2)Interoperability, is a well consecrated term for defining a well established
principle which we all involved with CCSDS are certainly commited to, since
its inception. The example you gave is pertinent, although it does not mention
explicitly word "communication" as it may also be implied when "information
(and/or communication) systems" is mentioned;

3)Cross-support, has been so far, possibly, the major motivation and cohesion
factor principle, in the realm of CCSDS association, I would believe. Unless
CCSDS agencies may decide to redefine its (or, one of its...) main purpose(s),
as enclosed by this term, I do believe that  it continues to be a very solid
principle that justifies its own existence. That is, if not the biggest,
serenely, I feel it, at least, as a major "raison-d'etre" for CCSDS, justified
as it is, as an international body... 

Also, it would be inconceivably practicle to look for cross-support if
interoperability is not to be considered as a basic mean for achieving
it...Both principles come hand-in-hand when looking toward a durable,
desirably rewarding engineering solution as we certainly look for, in
CCSDS...

If we have come and still are coming through such an in depth change in the
structure of CCSDS, it is reasonable that we may take a more careful look at
its own Charter, even if it is done in an advanced phase of the whole process.
A matter of preserving consistency, to the extent that it may be justified.

Best regards,

Eduardo

-------------------------------------------------------
Date:  03:31 PM GMT, 08/23/2004  
From:  "Adrian J. Hooke" <adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov> 
To:  Eduardo Bergamini <e.w.bergamini at stanfordalumni.org>  
Cc:  Secretariat <Secretariat at ccsds.org>, Adrian Hooke
<adrian.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov>, cmc-exec at mailman.ccsds.org  
Subject:  Re: Action Required - CMC Review of Proposed Change to the CCSDS
Charter   


"Adrian J. Hooke" <adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

06:38 AM 8/23/2004, Eduardo Bergamini wrote:
. and, also, includes further suggestions, which are written in red 
lettering and expressed in the same file, as attached.

Eduardo: I disagree with your suggested additions for the following reasons:

1. The term "information technology" has a pretty standard definition which
already covers the split between applications and data communications,  e.g.,
try Googling "definition information technology" and you will get multiple
returns like-- information technology (IT): The branch of technology devoted
to (a) the study and application of data and the processing thereof; i.e., the
automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation (including transformation),
management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission
or reception of data, and (b) the development and use of the  hardware,
software, firmware, and procedures associated with this processing.

2. Similarly, if you Google "definition interoperability" you get back 
things like: The ability of information systems to operate in conjunction with
each other encompassing communication protocols, hardware software,
application, and data compatibility layers.

3. Conversely, the term "cross-support" is space jargon and nobody 
understands it. Try Googling "definition cross-support" and you mostly get
CCSDS pages, except for 
http://www.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu:8080/~cswingle/woodworking/sewing_steps.phtml
where a bearded guy is making some wooden steps for his mother.

So I would argue that making those additions in fact makes the CCSDS 
charter less clear, not more. I'd strongly recommend that the CMC should 
simply focus on deleting those four words "for exclusively peaceful 
purposes" and should not take this as an opportunity to open up the whole 
charter for revision.

Best regards
Adrian








____________________________________________________________________