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

Adrian J. Hooke adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov
Fri Jul 21 16:23:03 EDT 2006


>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)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc-exec/attachments/20060721/980caa6d/attachment.html


More information about the CMC-exec mailing list