[MOIMS-NAV-EXEC] FW: [EXTERNAL] [Cesg-all] Results of CESG Polls closing 14 September 2023

[Berry, David S (US 3920)]

All (especially Jose Miguel):



See highlights below... we are halfway there with PRM Corrigendum.



David







On 9/15/23, 11:56 AM, "CESG-All on behalf of CCSDS Secretariat via CESG-All" <cesg-all-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:cesg-all-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org>> wrote:





CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2023-08-002 Approval to publish CCSDS 232.0-B-4 Cor. 1, Technical Corrigendum to CCSDS 232.0-B-4, Issued October 2021





Results of CESG poll beginning 31 August 2023 and ending 14 September 2023:





Abstain: 0 (0%)

Approve Unconditionally: 5 (83.33%) (Barkley, Fischer, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Moury)

Approve with Conditions: 1 (16.67%) (Shames)

Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)





CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:





Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): ​In the edits provided for sec 6.5.3 the following text is added:





Whenever retransmission of Type-AD Transfer Frames is required in a series

of frames that originally included both Type-AD and Type-BD frames, then

the SDLS ProcessSecurity Anti-Replay function will reject any retransmitted

frames, if authentication is used, based upon their lower anti-replay sequence

count in comparison to the Type-BD anti-replay sequence count (falsely

labelling them as SDLS security failures). Therefore, mixing Type-AD and

Type-BD frames on the same VC secured by SDLS is generally not advised

unless Type-BD frames are sent only after all Type-AD frames have been

accepted on board.





The wording of the first sentence does not adequately emphasize that this discussion is about authentication. Please reword this sentence as follows:





If authentication is used, and whenever retransmission of Type-AD Transfer Frames is required in a series

of frames that originally included both Type-AD and Type-BD frames, then

the SDLS ProcessSecurity Anti-Replay function will reject any retransmitted

frames, based upon their lower anti-replay sequence count in comparison to the Type-BD anti-replay sequence count (falsely

labelling them as SDLS security failures).









Total Respondents: 6





All Areas responded to this question.













SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions

PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed





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





CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2023-08-003 Approval to release CCSDS 732.0-P-4.1, AOS Space Data Link Protocol (Sheets, Issue 4.1) for CCSDS Agency review





Results of CESG poll beginning 31 August 2023 and ending 14 September 2023:





Abstain: 0 (0%)

Approve Unconditionally: 6 (100%) (Barkley, Fischer, Shames, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Moury)

Approve with Conditions: 0 (0%)

Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)





Total Respondents: 6





All Areas responded to this question.













SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved Unconditionally

PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll





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





CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2023-08-004 Approval to publish CCSDS 509.0-B-1 Cor. 2, Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 509.0-B-1, Issued February 2018





Results of CESG poll beginning 31 August 2023 and ending 14 September 2023:



Abstain: 0 (0%)

Approve Unconditionally: 6 (100%) (Barkley, Fischer, Shames, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Moury)

Approve with Conditions: 0 (0%)

Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)



Total Respondents: 6



All Areas responded to this question.



SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved Unconditionally

PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll





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





CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2023-08-005 Approval to publish CCSDS 876.1-M-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services—Specification for Dictionary of Terms for Electronic Data Sheets (Magenta Book, Issue 1)





Results of CESG poll beginning 31 August 2023 and ending 14 September 2023:





Abstain: 0 (0%)

Approve Unconditionally: 4 (66.67%) (Fischer, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Moury)

Approve with Conditions: 2 (33.33%) (Barkley, Shames)

Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)





CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:





Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions): ​Similar concern/condition as that noted by the SE AD. It would be better if there was a dedicated registry in SANA to record the DoTs (Dictionary of Terms).





A comment, but not a conditation -- this tends to point at the need for (resuming) coordination work regarding the CSS Area FRM -- functional resource model. I see this -- MB for DoT -- as being a more detailed elaboration relative to functions that are identified in the FRM (if and when the FRM addresses on board funcitons).





Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): ​Upon reviewing this document, and the SANA registries, I believe that there are some disconnects. For instance, there does not appear to be a SANA registry for a "Dictionary of Terms (DoT)". The SANA Registry that is cited, https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://sanaregistry.org/r/sois/__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!McBWuhqDhUc5YJwGT5k844xcz9XCzH5DLH9QHTiQ6gXAI-ux0jYpgoqE197rMPFxVdJaOPxibM595YwWl6R2J0jMyK4UBDBH$ <https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://sanaregistry.org/r/sois/__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!McBWuhqDhUc5YJwGT5k844xcz9XCzH5DLH9QHTiQ6gXAI-ux0jYpgoqE197rMPFxVdJaOPxibM595YwWl6R2J0jMyK4UBDBH$> , contains a large number of files, such as SEDS in XML form, various OWL files, a "SEDS core semantics" and a SEDS.xsd. The SEDS Core Semantics does appear to contain a sort of Dictionary of Terms, but the name is confusing and there is no specific DoTerms provided. There is also a Dictionary of Types (also DoT), but this is really types and not Terms. Please clarify. You might also consider including these Terms in the formal CCSDS Terms registry.









Total Respondents: 6





All Areas responded to this question.













SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions

PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed





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





CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2023-08-006 Approval to publish CCSDS 702.1-B-1 Cor. 2, Technical Corrigendum 2 to CCSDS 702.1-B-1, issued September 2012





Results of CESG poll beginning 31 August 2023 and ending 14 September 2023:





Abstain: 0 (0%)

Approve Unconditionally: 6 (100%) (Barkley, Fischer, Shames, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez, Moury)

Approve with Conditions: 0 (0%)

Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)





Total Respondents: 6





All Areas responded to this question.













SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved Unconditionally

PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll





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





CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2023-08-007 Approval to publish CCSDS 734.1-B-1 Cor. 1, Technical Corrigendum to CCSDS 734.1-B-1, Issued May 2015





Results of CESG poll beginning 31 August 2023 and ending 14 September 2023:





Abstain: 0 (0%)

Approve Unconditionally: 4 (80%) (Barkley, Fischer, Cola, Aguilar Sanchez)

Approve with Conditions: 1 (20%) (Shames)

Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)





CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:





Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): The registration process defined in Sec 3.6 of this document is completely inadequate for the purpose. "LTP Engine IDs" are allocated by the SANA. So far so good. But the SANA LTP Engine Registry (https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://sanaregistry.org/r/ltp_engineid/__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!McBWuhqDhUc5YJwGT5k844xcz9XCzH5DLH9QHTiQ6gXAI-ux0jYpgoqE197rMPFxVdJaOPxibM595YwWl6R2J0jMyN9SnQBv$ <https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://sanaregistry.org/r/ltp_engineid/__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!McBWuhqDhUc5YJwGT5k844xcz9XCzH5DLH9QHTiQ6gXAI-ux0jYpgoqE197rMPFxVdJaOPxibM595YwWl6R2J0jMyN9SnQBv$> ) only records a range of numbers assigned to some organization. There is no: 1) PoC at that organization to make a request of, 2) guidance as to how those numbers are assigned nor what records must be kept, 3) registry of assigned IDs, 4) ""location of assigned IDs. This really must be fixed if this is to be a useful operational registry.









Total Respondents: 5





All Areas responded to this question.













SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions

PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed





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













_______________________________________________

CESG-All mailing list

CESG-All at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:CESG-All at mailman.ccsds.org>

https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cesg-all__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!McBWuhqDhUc5YJwGT5k844xcz9XCzH5DLH9QHTiQ6gXAI-ux0jYpgoqE197rMPFxVdJaOPxibM595YwWl6R2J0jMyCar2Iv1$ <https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cesg-all__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!McBWuhqDhUc5YJwGT5k844xcz9XCzH5DLH9QHTiQ6gXAI-ux0jYpgoqE197rMPFxVdJaOPxibM595YwWl6R2J0jMyCar2Iv1$>




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/moims-nav-exec/attachments/20230915/18aab07f/attachment-0001.htm>