[Css-csts] FW: [CESG] Results of CESG poll closing 21 December 2009

[Barkley, Erik J (317H)]

Dear Margherita, Yves,

It appears that there is a RID with regard to the forward SLE services to address.  I believe we will have to address the concern before the updated SLE books can be published.  Please let me know your assessment of the finding and the proposed course of action.  Thank you very much.

Best regards,

-Erik

-----Original Message-----
From: cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of CCSDS Secretariat
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 9:02 AM
To: cesg at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: [CESG] Results of CESG poll closing 21 December 2009

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2009-12-001 Approval to publish 
updated SLE Service Specifications
Results of CESG poll beginning 2 December 2009 and ending 21 December 2009:

                  Abstain:  1 (14.29%) (Gerner)
  Approve Unconditionally:  5 (71.43%) (Thompson, Barkley, Taylor, 
Moury, Durst)
  Approve with Conditions:  1 (14.29%) (Shames)
  Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

      Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions):  The RAF (911x1b3, RCF 
(911x2b2) and ROCF (911x5b2 are unconditionally approved.   The FSP 
(912x3b2) and CLTU (912x1b3) are approved with conditions.

The FSP specification contains some potentially very confusing 
language. On pg 2-4 it describes merging of multiple space packet 
data streams in a single instance (or multiple instances) of a 
Forward TC VC Data Insertion SLE-FG.  The output of one (or more) of 
these SLE-FGs is a stream of TC frames that are intended to be sent 
to a "Forward CLTU Generation SLE-FG", see fig 2-3.  However, there 
is no definition of what this CLTU Generation SLE-FG is, nor is there 
a clear definition of how it is intended to operate.

Similarly, the FCLTU specification is stated to accept a stream of 
CLTUs, which presumably would be output by this same Forward
CLTU Generation SLE-FG, but this function is nowhere defined in the 
SLE specifications.

Related to this, in the FSP (and also in the SLE RM) is a reference 
to a Forward TC Frame (FTCF) service (see FSP, sec 2.6.3).  The 
language use in this section, and in several other places, says 
"underlying FTCF service (or equivalent)".  This is not adequate in 
that the nature of this service (functional behavior) is nowhere specified.

Conditions:

Clean up the usage of the term "Forward TC Frame (FTCF) 
service".  Provide an unambiguous definition of the behavior of this 
SLE-FG and / or the "service".  Clarify that the required behavior of 
the SLE-FG may be specified within the implementation of the FSP 
service such that the output can be directly fed to an instance of 
the SLE-FCLTU service.  Or, alternatively, otherwise provide an 
unambiguous definition of the Forward TC Frame (FTCF) service or of 
the Forward CLTU Generation SLE-FG such that the required behavior 
and it insertion into the processing chain is clearly and completely defined.


Total Respondents:  7

All Areas responded to this question.



SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


_______________________________________________
CESG mailing list
CESG at mailman.ccsds.org
http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/cesg