[Sls-rfm] Fw: CCSDS RFM WG Spring meeting - second set of comments received on 3 DDOR inputs - revision

[Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int]

Dear All,

as announced, having received the latest version of the white rec 2.5.7B 
with revision marks, I made a few changes to my already submitted second 
set of comments.
The applicable text (including and superseding the old one) is here (I 
added a note to my comment no. 1 and added new comments no. 3-6):

1. Missing recommends

REC 2.5.6B recommends (8) on power reduction, (9) on PFD and (10) on 
adjacent band apply to REC 2.5.7B and shall be included.

REC 2.5.6B recommends (7) is included partly in REC 2.5.7B recommends (10) 
with exception of the 30 dBHz limit that was removed. It shall be 
included.

NOTE: the power level (power reduction and 30 dBHz limit) is important 
because there are also even harmonics which are not modulated by the 
wide-band signal.

2. Frequency bands

All tables plus several recommends (and maybe considering, not verified) 
in 2.5.7B indicate X- or Ka-band. They shall be replaced by the applicable 
frequency ranges as in REC 2.5.6B.

3. REC 2.5.7B recommends 1

I would recommend adding a note for implementers on how to generate a 
sine-wave subcarrier multiplied by a PN code (resulting in no residual 
subcarrier, etc.)

4. REC 2.5.7B Table 2.5.7B-3

The text on synthesizing frequency sidebands that are not symmetric about 
the carrier shall not be in a note. It is mandatory under certain 
conditions. Since REC 2.5.6B recommends 10 "that no DOR tones in the 
31.3–31.8 GHz band shall be employed" has to be included as an additional 
recommends in 2..5.7B, the asymmetric spectrum generation shall be at 
least copied in this new recommend. In the same sentence, we could say 
that this is optional at 8 GHz.

5. REC 2.5.7B, Annex 2, Informative

It would be nice to add the 3 spectrum plots as given in the explanatory 
sections of SLS-RFM_20-04, especially if the comment raised by Wai on the 
predistortion results in changes to the recommendation. Even without such 
changes, the first spectrum plot would be a nice to have picture 
(indicating chip rate, subcarrier frequency, roll-off).

6. REC 2.5.6B and REC 2.5.7B

I noted that nowhere in these two recommendations we specify that the 
carrier is phase modulated by the DDOR subcarrier. I am not sure why it 
has been like this for decades in 2.5.6B. If we decide to enter this in 
2.5.7B, we should also do it in 2.5.6B and send both together for agency 
review.

That's it for me.


Best Regards, Enrico

----- Forwarded by Enrico Vassallo/esoc/ESA on 04/05/20 10:54 -----

From:   Enrico Vassallo/esoc/ESA
To:     sls-rfm at mailman.ccsds.org <sls-rfm at mailman.ccsds.org>, 
Andrea.Modenini at esa.int <Andrea.Modenini at esa.int>, 
Giovanni.Boscagli at esa.int <Giovanni.Boscagli at esa.int>, 
Javier.DeVicente at esa.int <Javier.DeVicente at esa.int>, 
James.S.Border at jpl.nasa.gov, "Volk, Christopher P (US 335D)" 
<christopher.p.volk at jpl.nasa.gov>, Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int 
<Massimo.Bertinelli at esa.int>, victor.j.sank at nasa.gov
Date:   21/04/20 18:18
Subject:        Fw: CCSDS RFM WG Spring meeting - second set of comments 
received on 3 DDOR inputs


Dear All,

please see the second set of comments by me on REC 2.5.7B as in 
SLS-RFM_20-04 (but also in 20-03). They only relate to a comparison with 
2.5.6B. I may have further comments on the recommendation 2.5.7B itself 
when I see the version with track changes. 

Additionally, there is an input paper sent to C&S but actually dealing 
also with RFM and focused on labeling of shift registers and 
polynomials.The convention used in 2.5.7B is in line with other books but 
the opposite of what proposed in this paper.
I will send the paper out shortly as third set of comments.

As for the previous email, please do not start replying at this stage. On 
May 6, I will discuss with Jim how to handle all received comments.

Regards, Enrico

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Missing recommends

REC 2.5.6B recommends (8) on power reduction, (9) on PFD and (10) on 
adjacent band apply to REC 2.5.7B and shall be included.

REC 2.5.6B recommends (7) is included partly in REC 2.5.7B recommends (10) 
with exception of the 30 dBHz limit that was removed. It shall be 
included.

2. Frequency bands

All tables plus several recommends (and maybe considering, not verified) 
in 2.5.7B indicate X- or Ka-band. They shall be replaced by the applicable 
frequency ranges as in REC 2.5.6B.




This message is intended only for the recipient(s) named above. It may contain proprietary information and/or
protected content. Any unauthorised disclosure, use, retention or dissemination is prohibited. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately. ESA applies appropriate organisational measures to protect
personal data, in case of data privacy queries, please contact the ESA Data Protection Officer (dpo at esa.int).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-rfm/attachments/20200504/5831271a/attachment.htm>