[Css-csts] Ambiguous issues regarding the MD-CSTS

[John Pietras]

Martin and CSTSWG colleagues ---

During the review of the draft MD-CSTS in Portsmouth, I made short notes about the review comments in my copy of the MD-CSTS. Upon reviewing those notes, I came across two comments thay are cryptic enough that I need some help in remembering what the issues are.

 

1. Note 3 under section 2.2.1 states: "The syntax of the fully qualified name is outside the scope of this Recommended Standard. The syntax is defined as part of the specification of each set of monitored parameters and notifiable events that are transferred by the MD-CSTS." I recorded the comment "to be discussed". 

 

As I (vaguely) recall, this was an issue that Martin raised, and I believe that it had to do with whether we should defer the syntax definition to the monitord data dictionary(ies) or pick one and specify it in the MD-CSTS. However, I don't recall that we ever returned to the topic. I guess that we'll have to coninue the discussion via email, Can the person who raised this issue (Martin?) please restate the concern?

 

(On a related topic, I have decided to delete the informative reference to the nonexistent Monitored Data for Space Communication Services standard. Instead, I have put in a statement in a Note that simply states that CCSDS may define a standard set.)

 

 

2. Section 4.6.3 (Default Monitored Parameter List) states: "Service Management shall establish a single default set of monitored parameters for each Service Agreement". I recoerded the comment "Revisit". I do not recall the concern here - can anyone enlighten me?

 

 

Thank you for any help you can provide in clarifying these matters.

 

Best regards,

John

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/css-csts/attachments/20100716/1eab8586/attachment.htm