[CMC] DAI WG Response

[Nestor.Peccia at esa.int]

Dear CMC members,

Considering that 
a mail was sent yesterday by the Secretariat asking the CMC for guidance 
on the action placed upon the DAI WG / MOIMS ADs during the last CMC 
meeting (without consulting first the CESG Chairs)
the DAI WG Chair is insisting via the Secretariat  to comply more with the 
due date agreed with the CMC than the MOIMS ADs obligations vis a vis any 
of its WGs wrt roadmap, architecture and protocols cross-check at Area and 
CESG level.

I, as CESG Chair, would like to express my humble opinion 

As stated in my mail from 28th Oct 2016, the action was placed upon the 
DAI WG and the MOIMS ADs (not only on the WG chairs) I attach the text 
below for the sake of consistency
The DAI WG TN was officially distributed to the MOIMS ADs and CESG Chairs 
by 25th January 2017 (i.e. 5 working days before the due date of 1st Feb 
2017). The WG needed ca. 3 months to issue the TN
There is currently no consensus between the WG Chair and the ADs about the 
TN final contents (several comments have been raised by the ADs who 
reviewed it during the last weekend, but further analysis is needed). 
Therefore the next step would be (in case of persistence of the 
non-consensus)  to bring the issue at CESG level. The WG Chair can not 
bypass the hierarchical chain, contacting the CMC via the Secretariat
ADs have (according to the Proc & Org YB) the task to 
assess the WG charter
ensure the quality and content of the WG / Area roadmap
ensure that the Area work follows the set of architectural principles 
agreed by the CESG and is properly synchronized with work in other areas 
make sure that technical cross-pollination occurs among the various Area 
WGs 
1 month delay in the completion of an action has no impact in the 
whereabouts of the DAI WG. The schedule relaxation on DAI Projects (due to 
lack of resources)  has been a regular pattern during the last  years.

Therefore, I suggest as CESG Chair  that CMC agrees with the new action 
due date proposed by the MOIMS ADs, i.e. 1st March 2017

Last but not least, the CESG Chair fully supports the past / current / 
future work of the DAI WG and endorses its existence. The only objection 
is on the way the above mentioned action was / is being handled

ciao
nestor

===========================
Action to be completed by DAI WG Chairs and MOIMS ADs
RESOLUTION 25.  DAI WG Resolution: 
CMC acknowledges that in today?s  Data Economy, space systems  generating 
and transporting large amounts of relevant data;  be it science (GAIA is 
generating 50 GB/day) earth observation (Sentinel-2A generating 1 TB/ h), 
navigation or telecommunication satellites,  constitute key assets for the 
Data industry.
In this context, standards supporting proper storage and preservation of 
data, open access to the space data, merging of data from different 
sources, analysis and processing big data and all related processes and 
mechanisms are of paramount importance.
Scientific communities are already for quite some time working nationally 
and internationally to define adequate standards for their data, be it 
astronomy, planetary exploration or earth observation.
The question is what should the CCSDS organisation do and how should it 
position itself in the wake of such space data revolution and  how could 
the work done over the years to standardise data storage and archiving be 
leveraged at the service of the new paradigms.
In this context, and following the request of the DAI WG to the CMC for 
support, CMC would like to encourage the DAI WG to address the following 
questions within a short paper to be delivered to CMC by 1 February 2017:
What is the current DAI roadmap and how does it make a valuable 
contribution to the data issue, taking into account what has already been 
produced including the overall worldwide efforts in this area?
Taking into account that there are dedicated international organisations 
working on archiving and merging scientific data, astronomy data, as well 
as Earth data, what should be the role of CCSDS in general and that of the 
DAI WG in particular? 
Is the long term data preservation of the housekeeping data properly 
addressed in these initiatives? Is there a need for developing this part 
of the data preservation?
In this context, what would be the next project for the DAI WG in the 
future, should resources be available, and how would this project fit with 
the current CCSDS reference architecture and work plan?
Clarification: None. DAI and MOIMS to produce the requested TN.
Take Notice: M. Merri / B. Behal, D. Giaretta / J. Garrett

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc/attachments/20170202/a0ecd89f/attachment.html>