[Moims-sc] Updated MO Green book for WG review
Stefan.Gaertner at dlr.de
Stefan.Gaertner at dlr.de
Fri Mar 8 15:34:06 UTC 2019
thank you for the updated Green Book, which reads very well and provides a significant improvement compared to our old version. I circulated the draft to my colleagues and feedback was largely positive. These are the comments by my co-workers and me:
General: Motivate in some sentences: What is the great benefit compared to standard IF-technologies as provided by Google, Amazon (chapter 7.4 gives some useful hints, but this should be more stressed - they will not convince highly motivated hard core programmers fresh from university).
1.1: Why differentiate between commercial and project developer? This is somehow an agency-centristic-view.
3.2: Already mention here that the same service model can also be used to specify non-standard services, e.g. for mission functions too specific to be subject to standardization or for services intended to be used intra-agency only. Thus, MO provides benefits even when leaving the realm of standard services.
3.4: Describe that inter-operability is achieved solely by agreeing on the communication mapping. Furthermore, language mapping may not only be different between providers and consumers, but may also be a non-standard mapping without sacrificing inter-operability.
3.6.4: Use Case Constellation - no data exchange to/from manufacturers shown in the image - this gives the impression that there is no benefit.
4.4.1: Add something like the following to the first paragraph: "... such that the Directory service needs to be the only well-known service."
5: It would also be helpful to provide the information how to get the actual service description XMLs of the standard services (i.e. SANA registry).
5.3: First paragraph is duplicated by second and third.
7.1: Some design examples implementing security would be nice.
7.3: "A supported deployment is there..." Grammar? Besides, regarding security: How can the archive service decide which information may be sent to a user, and which not; is a discrimination on individual data objects possible? Separation of missions.
Fig. 8.2: Maybe another possible use case: Sometimes it might be necessary to use a specific non-MO technology (e.g. for video streaming, realtime frame telemetry/SLE), however, it would be nice to use MO for administrating these data exchanges, e.g. the consumer/provider could negotiate, using MO/MAL, to provide the data via an MO-independent connection (similar to the File Services, 9.2.6., using an ftp connection).
9.3.6: Exchange "lower bandwidth" with "non performance-critical" or something similar - because otherwise use of XML and HTTP would be difficult to justify.
From: MOIMS-SC [mailto:moims-sc-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Sam Cooper
Sent: Montag, 4. März 2019 10:35
To: MOIMS-SC at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: Re: [Moims-sc] Updated MO Green book for WG review
Just a quick reminder for comments if you have them are due by the 8th.
On 14/02/2019 13:41, Sam Cooper wrote:
Please find below the link to the latest draft of the MO Concept Green Book for review:
Please could people provide comments etc by 8th of March in three weeks time.
The contents of the book is 95% complete, just the future directions section to be expanded on, if people could suggest content for that as part of the review that would be very helpful. It is also not in official CCSDS format, but that is relatively easy to add at a later date.
I think Peter has done a great job in writing this, however it has taken far longer than we had hoped therefore I would like to suggest that I take over the editing/updating of the document from this point forward. If there is an issue with this suggestion please let me know otherwise I will assume that it is acceptable.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MOIMS-SC