[Css-rasg] Re: d0-SM&C-OverlapSolutions-05-Sep-2010.xls

Wed Sep 8 02:52:40 EDT 2010

Hi Erik,

let us go through your proposed actions to either confirm them or suggest 
alternatives. This we can do in about 10 days. Then, maybe a telecon could 
be a good way forward.

Ciao

__mario

From:
"Barkley, Erik J (317H)" <erik.j.barkley at jpl.nasa.gov>
To:
"Mario.Merri at esa.int" <Mario.Merri at esa.int>
Cc:
CCSDS RA SIG <CSS-RASG at mailman.ccsds.org>, "Nestor.Peccia at esa.int" 
<Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>, "Shames, Peter M (313B)" 
<peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, "'Colin.Haddow at esa.int'" 
<Colin.Haddow at esa.int>
Date:
07/09/2010 02:33
Subject:
d0-SM&C-OverlapSolutions-05-Sep-2010.xls

Dear Mario,

The CMC has recently approved the minutes from the June meeting (see email 
below).  To the best of my knowledge this essentially means that the 
resolutions are official.  I do not see anything in the minutes that 
revises the resolution affecting RASIG and SM+C (a copy of that resolution 
is immediately below). 

Accordingly, in response to the top priority listed in the CMC resolution 
(??.as the top priority, the CMC resolves that the RA-SIG should first 
start with the analysis previously generated by the SEA AD.  They should 
focus on reaching agreement on that set of specific issues, and provide 
recommendations to resolve issues where CCSDS working groups are working 
on overlapping solutions and/or are conflicting with each other??), please 
find attached an initial draft spreadsheet with some proposed actions 
relative to the SEA AD recommendations (the source of those 
recommendations ? Peter?s presentation from last year is also attached for 
your reference).   My sincere hope is that we can use this spreadsheet to 
begin forging a better CCSDS-wide understanding of the various 
recommendations fit together.   I am very interested in learning what your 
comments, etc maybe with regard to the proposed actions. 

I will be out of the office the remainder of the week but if you would 
like to have a teleconference later this month I would be interested in 
doing the same.

Best regards,

-Erik

---CMC resolution re RASIG, SM+C, etc---

CMC-A-2010-06-Resolution 2:
The CMC commends the RA-SIG for the significant accomplishments and 
progress that has been made since its formation at the Fall 2009 CMC 
meeting. While the current approach has the clear potential to produce a 
comprehensive solution if sufficient resources are applied, the CMC is 
concerned that the proposed scope of work is too broad for the currently 
available resources and consequently the work plan needs to be narrowed in 
order to be achievable within a realistic resource envelope.
Accordingly, and as the top priority, the CMC resolves that the RA-SIG 
should first start with the analysis previously generated by the SEA AD. 
They should focus on reaching agreement on that set of specific issues, 
and provide recommendations to resolve issues where CCSDS working groups 
are working on overlapping solutions and/or are conflicting with each 
other.

As a second priority the RA-SIG should concurrently develop a basic CCSDS 
reference architecture for mission operations, but they should limit that 
work to focus on the application service architecture (i.e., applications 
above the network layer).

Specifically, to proceed on both priorities, the CMC resolves that the 
RA-SIG group should:
1.       Ignore the data communications aspects; assume that we have at 
least a Network layer platform for transfer of data among the ground 
elements (TCP-UDP/IP) and between the ground elements and the spacecraft 
(BP, IP).
2.       Assume that we may have several messaging protocols for transfer 
of data among the ground elements and that AMS is used between the ground 
elements and the spacecraft
3.       Focus on the architecture and organization of CCSDS Mission 
Operations applications that run on the Messaging/Network layer platform.
4.       Start with the SM&C MO architecture. Modify it as necessary to 
reach consensus on an agreed   taxonomy of CCSDS mission operations 
applications that need to interoperate. Achieve this by integrating RA-SIG 
and SM&C architecture personnel as necessary to reach a consensus.
5.       Not delay the processing or approval of CCSDS books that have 
almost completed processing, but it is OK to delay CCSDS books that are in 
relatively early stages.
6.       Apply the resulting candidate mission operations application 
interoperability architecture to a well-known use case, e.g., cooperative 
ESA/NASA Mars missions in 2016 and 2018, to discover its robustness.
7.       Report the results at the Fall 2010 meeting.

The CMC recognizes that some of the overlap issues will require more time 
than 6 months. But by the Fall 2010 meeting, the group should show 
significant progress, including solid technical consensus on resolving 
many of the overlap issues.

---official CMC minutes approval email---

From: cesg-all-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [
mailto:cesg-all-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of CCSDS Secretariat
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 12:14 PM
To: CMC at mailman.ccsds.org
Cc: cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: [Cesg-all] Results of CMC Polls Closing 31 August-2 September 
2010

CMC E-Poll Identifier:  CMC-P-2010-08-005 Authorization to approve 
the draft minutes from the June 2010 CMC meeting in Brazil

Results of CMC poll beginning 18 August 2010 and ending 31 August 2010:

                 ADOPT:  5 (83.33%) (DLR, ESA, FSA, JAXA, NASA)
   ADOPT PROVISIONALLY:  1 (16.67%) (CNES)
                REJECT:  0 (0%)
  REJECT WITH COMMENTS:  0 (0%)

      CNES:  Comments:
- Title on first page should remind the dates of the meetings.
- Section 4 (actions) : the status of the actions should refer to 
their respective action number and title.
- Section 10 (IOAG) :
* First sentence is not clear : reference to SFCG must be wrong ; 
text "similar to CCSDS" should be deleted.
* Fourth sentence "need to discuss how to work ... BOF" is not clear 
and should be deleted or clarified.
- Section 11 (Area reports) :
* for each area, thank you to add the names of the presenter.
* fifth bullet (pink sheets on TC frame repeat) : sentence should be 
reworded as the CESG cannot request that the CMC issues a blue book 
and pink sheets should go to agency review (if significant) or the 
epoll (if editorial).
* SIS area report : typo on Space (not Safe) packet protocol.
* SE report (first sentence) : replace "CMC appoint at least two 
other members" with "CMC appoints two non-US members".
- Section 12 (SANA) : in first sentence replace "other agencies" with 
"non-US agencies".
- Section 14 (IOAG) : typo on Mr Hooke's name ; The second paragraph 
should start with "The CMC resolved".
- Section 18 (Publication) : add the following as last but one paragraphs:
"Mr Moury indicated more editorial comments will be provided.
The secretariat was tasked to update th yellow book accordingly with 
the results of discussions."
- Action item table : the line with "action items from the june 2010 
meeting" is repeated too many times in the table ; please clean it.

Results are based on responses from 6 out of 11 members (54.55%).

No response was received from the following Agencies:

ASI
UKSA
CNSA
CSA
INPE

Secretariat Interpretation of Results:  Adopted Provisionally
Resulting CMC Resolution:               CMC-R-2010-08-006
Inferred Secretariat Action:            Release minutes after 
provisions have been addressed.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CMC E-Poll Identifier:  CMC-P-2010-08-006 Authorization to publish 
Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 133.0-B-1, Space Packet Protocol (Blue Book, 
Issue 1, September 2003)

Results of CMC poll beginning 18 August 2010 and ending 2 September 2010:

                 ADOPT:  6 (85.71%) (DLR, ESA, INPE, JAXA, NASA, UKSA)
   ADOPT PROVISIONALLY:  1 (14.29%) (CNES)
                REJECT:  0 (0%)
  REJECT WITH COMMENTS:  0 (0%)

      CNES:  Approval is based on assumption that this corrigendum 
will be reported to SC13 for alignment of the ISO standard.
      INPE:  The approval assumes that the concomitant process 
through ISO TC20/SC13 will be provided for the updating of the 
corresponding document in the ISO domain.

Results are based on responses from 7 out of 11 members (63.64%).

No response was received from the following Agencies:

ASI
CNSA
CSA
FSA

Secretariat Interpretation of Results:  Adopted Provisionally
Resulting CMC Resolution:               CMC-R-2010-09-001
Inferred Secretariat Action:            Publish Corrigendum

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

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

 [attachment "SEA SM&C - CCSDS Standard Overlap Analysis v4 30Sep09.ppt" 
deleted by Mario Merri/esoc/ESA] [attachment 
"d0-SM&C-OverlapSolutions-05-Sep-2010.xls" deleted by Mario 
Merri/esoc/ESA] 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/css-rasg/attachments/20100908/63e35b6c/attachment.htm