[CMC E-Poll Alert] Re: [CESG] Re: CMC Poll - Modification of CCSDS Working Group charter content

[Jean-Luc.Gerner at esa.int]

Adrian, Jean-Marc,

One of the problem we have been facing over the past years is the lack of
flexibility from the agencies side; these have a yearly plan which is
established a couple of months before the start of the fiscal year. Asking
agencies to modify their plan several times per year to accomodate new WGs is
too heavy.

Agencies are used to commit the percent availability of their
representatives, valid for the whole year and in many cases reconducted the
year after. These are rather stable figures that CCSDS can rely on. Why not
then leave it up to CCSDS to internally manage the resources provided by the
agencies, determining the priorities and reporting to the CMC on the usage of
the allocated resources?
In other words: the macro-management of the resources is negotiated with
agencies every year whereas micro-management is done whenever needed
internally to CCSDS.

Jean-Luc Gerner
TEC-ETN
Tel: +31 71 565 4473


                                                                             
             "Adrian J. Hooke"                                               
             <adrian.j.hooke at jp                                              
             l.nasa.gov>                                                  To 
             Sent by:                   CMC-Exec                             
             cesg-bounces at mailm         <cmc-exec at mailman.ccsds.org>         
             an.ccsds.org                                                 cc 
                                        CCSDS Engineering Steering Group -   
                                        ADs <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>         
             21/07/2006 22:23                                        Subject 
                                        [CESG] Re: CMC Poll - Modification   
                                        of CCSDS Working Group charter       
                                        content                              
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                                                             




      CMC-P-2006-07-002: Modification of CCSDS Working Group charter content
      and update procedures

      CNES     Soula Jean-Marc ADOPT PROVISIONALLY
      It should be clarified how the resource requirements will be passed to
      the CMC and how the resource allocation will be established. The
      operating plan was presented several times as the working document
      between the technical authority in the CCSDS and the decision
      authority, the main subject to work being the resource allocation. What
      is the substitute tool ?
      Also, it is not clear how the reporting from the CESG will integrate
      actual contributions.

Jean-Marc:

I think that the CMC needs to seriously reconsider the whole subject of
"resource allocations". Within a particular Agency, where the Principal
Delegate controls the resources, it is relatively easy to allocate resources.
But CCSDS is a "virtual Agency", with absolutely no concrete resources to
allocate.

With the current system, a WG has to submit a concrete resource request to a
"virtual budget". We have all seen now that this does not work and that it is
largely a waste of time. Somehow work that is perceived to be absolutely
necessary gets "virtually" done irrespective of whether the asked-for
concrete resources ever materialize, and conversely work that is not
perceived to be quite as necessary usually fades away.

The most important two questions that the CMC needs to ask before approving a
new WG are:

1. Is this necessary work?
2. Is at least one Agency prepared to commit to leading the work to
completion, even if that means doing the bulk of the technical work itself?

Providing that there is agreement on the need, and providing that someone is
prepared to shoulder the burden, it is highly likely that the work will get
done. Fretting about whether Agency "x" can commit 0.3 FTEs and Agency "y"
can commit 0.02 FTEs just doesn't seem to be worthwhile.

Best regards
Adrian


Adrian J. Hooke
Chairman, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG)
_______________________________________________
CESG mailing list
CESG at mailman.ccsds.org
http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg