[CESG] [Moims-dai] Proposed edits to the MACAO Blue Book
Shames, Peter M (312B)
peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov
Mon Jul 27 16:04:09 UTC 2015
The relevant file for the MOIMS DAI WG is attached. It is the draft mods for the SFDU CA procdures.
From: <cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>> on behalf of Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int<mailto:Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>>
Date: Monday, July 27, 2015 at 1:04 AM
To: "moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>" <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: [CESG] [Moims-dai] Proposed edits to the MACAO Blue Book
Daniele, DAI WG members and MOIMS ADs
Please discuss Peter's mail in your WG and with your AD/DAD
The update of the SFDU CA Procedures (630-0-B-1) does not exist as a Project in the CWE Framework. No resources have been committed by the Agencies to handle it. The next 5 year review is due in May 2018. It is clear that if the WG decides to work on it, a Project has to be created and resources have to be committed by the Agencies via a CMC poll.
In addition, the WG has to deal with three other potential 5 year review Projects (in case the WG decides to review it instead of Reconfirm them)
1. XFDU BB 5 year review is due since Sept 2013
2. EAST BB 5 year review is due in June 2015
3. PAIMS MB 5 year review due in June 2015
----- Forwarded by Nestor Peccia/esoc/ESA on 27/07/2015 09:48 -----
From: "Shames, Peter M (312B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
To: Boucon Daniele <Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr<mailto:Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr>>,
Cc: "moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>" <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Date: 26/07/2015 08:05
Subject: [Moims-dai] Proposed edits to the MACAO Blue Book
Sent by: moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>
[attachment "SANA YB 313x0y1 SEA edits 8Jul15.pdf" deleted by Nestor Peccia/esoc/ESA]
[attachment "630x0b1_mods-8Jul15.docx" deleted by Nestor Peccia/esoc/ESA]
[attachment "CCSDS Registry Re-engineering 10Jul15 v2.pptx" deleted by Nestor Peccia/esoc/ESA]
[attachment "CCSDS SSG Name & Number Registries v13.pptx" deleted by Nestor Peccia/esoc/ESA]
I hope all is well with you. I think that during one of our conversations I mentioned that the CESG and the SANA Steering Group (SSG) were looking into the somewhat confusing state of our registries in the SANA. We have noted that there are a number of issues and overlaps, particularly in the area of organization and person type registries. The attached presentation, "CCSDS SSG Name & Number Registries", describes the problem in significant detail and also spells out how we propose to fix it.
The presentaiton "CCSDS Registry Re-engineering" is the best current description of the form of "what" we propose to do. What we discovered in analyzing the set of CCSDS registries is that there is a set of registries that have to do with the "CCSDS enterprise", the agencies, observers, affiliates, and the people that they appoint to do certain tasks or that have certain roles. But what we also discovered is that some of these registries are well formed, others less so, but that there were overlaps and gaps.
We have a proposed plan for clearing all of this up.
The reason why I am contacting you as DAI WG chair, is the "how" we propose to do it. There are several parts to this that need to have CESG review and CMC concurrence. There is one, in particular, that needs WG concurrence. In the case of your MACAO Blue Book (CCSDS 630x0b1) we wish to leverage the very good work that has already been done to define and create registries for agencies, and agency sub-elements, and for persons with certain roles. The proposed extensions add some fields for unique identifiers and also a mechanism for adding new roles for identified persons to allow them to manage other registries than just the MACAO. This is a request for your WG to review what we have proposed to see if you can concur with the proposed changes which are in the attached mark-up.
The related changes we propose require some related edits to other documents. I have drafts of all of these prepared and CESG review is just awaiting some final adjustments:
SANA YB (CCSDS 313x0y1, SEA/SSG)
SCID BB (CCSDS 320x0b6, CMC / Secretariat)
And the creation of a new one:
Registry Management Policy (SEA/SSG)
What these changes do is to update the SANA Yellow Book to require WGs to use (or extend) existing registries where that makes sense, and to tell the SANA, in a timely way, when they are creating any new registries or proposing changes to existing registries. The key registries are those relating to organizations (agency, observer, affiliate) and to persons (with various roles). The change to the SCID BB is to add a few fields to that spec, including unique object identifiers for spacecraft, and to extend the current definitions of Agency Representative, the person nominated by an Agency (or Observer) to request changes to the SCID registry. We want to use the general pattern for "Agency Representative" as the way to manage all persons who are assigned (one or more) roles by their agencies. Thus one person (AR) might have only one Role (Agency Rep for SCID) or they might have more than one Role (Agency Rep for SCID, Agency Rep for MACAO, MACAO RP submitter).
After working over these concepts with the SSG, SANA Operator, and CCSDS website team we are convinced that a separate Registry Management Policy will be the best way to approach this overall body of work, so I have prepared a draft of that too. That still needs some final changes, so I am not sending it now, just the drafts of the SANA, SCID, and MACAO documents and the analysis and re-engineering materials.
I think you will find that the proposed changes do not affect any of the key fields, contents, or intent of what has already been defined in the MACAO. What they are intended to do it to adopt and extend the existing features so that these core enterprise registries can be re-used, and extended, by others. Please review these proposed changes with your WG at the earliest opportunity and let us know if there is an issue. We would all prefer to re-use and extend what is there instead of creating a parallel set of registries, but we can do that if it is deemed necessary.
Very best regards, Peter
Moims-dai mailing list
Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
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...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 393448 bytes
More information about the MOIMS-DAI