[MOIMS] MOIMS Comments to IOAG/MOSSG Report
Nestor.Peccia at esa.int
Nestor.Peccia at esa.int
Tue Sep 20 08:29:07 UTC 2016
As CESG Chair I have the following comments to the MOIMS response to MOSSG
The MOSSG report is generally very supportive of the MOIMS work, although
concerns are raised on their slow adoption. Once the report is approved by
the IOAG, it assumed that it should be promoted by the IOAG, thus speeding
up adoption by missions. How can the IOAG and CCSDS team up to best
Missions usually adopt published standards. Its slow motion is justified
by the lack of a minimum suite of SM&C standards that guarantees
IOAG has not given any priority to the Catalogue 3. MOSSG did it (but it
is the opinion of the SG members and not the result of an IOAG Agency wide
poll). CCSDS' comment will be to take them out in order to follow the same
process and format of SC #1 and 2. IOAG has its internal procedure to do
CCSDS shall issue a common and global comment for all 3 IOAG SCs (1, 2 and
3) wrt slow adoption by missions due to long elapsed time for production
of standards (associated with the lack of resources)
Just to give an example: When comparing our current Projects wrt SC#1 and
taking out the already published standards (6), we have 3 Approved , 6
Drafts and 6 not yet existing Projects. This means 36 resouces from all
SC#2 status is worse
CESG Chair Suggestion: Issue global comment for all IOAG SCs on slow
adoption by mission and lack of CCSDS resources to implement them
Considering the bullet above and the many comments/clarifications raised
on the draft Catalog#3, it is suggested that a small joint team,
MOSSG-MOIMS, initiate a technical discussion to refine Catalog#3.
I disagree. CCSDS needs to produce recommendations and leave away this
notion to continuously create new joint teams.
The idea was that the MOSSG completes its task after approval of the
As both MOSSG Chairs are members of the SM&C WG (one of them being the
Chair), the technical discussion is guaranteed within the CCSDS MOIMS SM&C
WG. The Rome meeting is the ideal venue to discuss it from the technical
point of view. Telecons and San Antonio meeting will also address this
CESG Chair suggestion: Enforce technical discussion of SC# 3 in the next 2
Technical meeting (Rome and San Antonio) and the usual monthly telecons.
R1.1: The recommendation is generally well received that we should focus
on a limited number of functional areas, however several comments have
been raised on the scope of the high priority functional areas (see
Calatog#3). In any case, even if minor misalignment in scope exists, we
would like to give priority to the books that are close to publication.
No comments shall be raised on priorities, because they are a consensus of
the SG members and not the result of an agreed IOAG Agencies poll.
CESG Chair Suggestion: Raise a global comment on SC#3: Take priorities out
I plan to circulate the 1st draft of the CCSDS Presentation to IOAG by
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...
More information about the MOIMS