[Sls-rfm] CCSDS RFM WG Spring meeting - comments received on DDOR inputs - status as of 6 April

[Enrico.Vassallo at esa.int]

Dear All,

for what concerns the DDOR input papers (dealing with REC 2.5.7B) to be 
discussed at the Spring meeting, the following four sets of comments plus 
one full input document (SLS-RFM_20-03) were submitted:

1. Comments by Wai on adding predistortion in considerings and recommends 
2. Comments by Enrico on several recommends 
3. Comments by Shannon and Victor on PN terminology (subset of doc 
CS_20-03) 
4. Comments by Andrea and Giovanni on several considerings and recommends 
5. ESA input paper SLS-RFM_20-03 on 2 dB vs 1 dB flatness, flexibility on 
chip rates, subcarrier frequencies, roll-off factors,  definition of SRRC 
shaping 

I have agreed with DDOR chair (Jim) the following course of actions:

A) Prepare and submit a detailed response to all raised issues
B) Prepare and submit the resulting revised version of REC 2.5.7B (and 
2.5.6B if alignment needed) 

The DDOR WG is trying to finalize tasks A and B. Jim with Christopher and 
myself with Dennis already exchanged several emails on this, and assuming 
we can reach agreement on 2, these tasks may be completed this week.
I would then give the RFM WG two weeks to make sure we all agree with the 
proposed changes and that the authors of the comments are satisfied by the 
responses.
After that, I will initiate agency review of 2.5.7B along with the other 
recommendations (as applicable) on freeze since the Fall 2019 meeting.

There is a catch though. Comments raised by 3 concern several other 
recommendations and books, some under C&S WG and two under SLP WG. It 
would be wise to study the proposal also from an overall impact point of 
view and take a global SLS area decision at the next face-to-face meeting 
in Toulouse.
With the normal CCSDS timeline, the agency review of 2.5.7B will most 
likely terminate shortly before the Toulouse meeting where RIDs 
disposition will take place. I propose that we consider the changes 
stemming from discussion of input 3, if any, as editorials so that we can 
insert them in Toulouse before sending the recommendation out for 
publication.

I noted that the C&S WG chair recommended the same path for item 3 and 
that also DDOR WG chair agreed to this.

Please let me know if you have problems with the proposed way forward.

Regards, Enrico

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/20200506/51472179/attachment.htm>