UC Quick comments for PICS: [Sls-slp] Proximity-1 DataLink Specification for final SLP WG review
Cosby Matthew
MCOSBY at qinetiq.com
Thu Sep 19 09:06:50 UTC 2013
Greg,
I agree with Gian Paolo on his points on section 5.4.
I think we should have:
- DLL-64 / 5.4.2.4 Mandatory if DLL-62 Supported
Tom will need to advise on how we represent that.
I would also suggest that we delete: (notional)
Hope to see you all in Texas.
Cheers, Matt.
Matthew Cosby
Chief Engineer, QinetiQ Space UK
Tel: +44 (0)1252 396313
email: mcosby at QinetiQ.com
www.QinetiQ.com <http://www.qinetiq.com/>
QinetiQ - Delivering customer-focused solutions
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
From: sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org
[mailto:sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of
Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int
Sent: 04 September 2013 09:16
To: Kazz, Greg J (313B)
Cc: CCSDS Secretariat; sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: Re: Quick comments for PICS: [Sls-slp] Proximity-1 DataLink
Specification for final SLP WG review
Greg,
Just about DLL-1.
DLL-1 should be removed if it refer to section 3.2.
Making DLL-1 to refer to 3.2.1 (instead of 3.2) makes the second comment
superseded.
I am not sure I agree about your view of section 5.4 and I would rather
use "conditional items" also because as far as I see this is the only
case (i.e. no big burden implied). However we can go Pink with the
present form (except the corrections you agreed) and discuss the matter
in San Antonio to generate RIDs (if needed).
One more comment: DLL-60 says "Time Correlation Process (notional)".
The term notional is mentioned only once in the document (i.e. here).
Should its meaning in PICS context be clarified (or alternatively
deleted)?
Ciao
Gian Paolo
From:
"Kazz, Greg J (313B)" <greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov>
To:
"Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int" <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>,
"sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org" <sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org>
Cc:
CCSDS Secretariat <tomg at aiaa.org>
Date:
03/09/2013 22:58
Subject:
Re: Quick comments for PICS: [Sls-slp] Proximity-1 Data Link
Specification for final SLP WG review
Sent by:
sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org
________________________________
G.P.
Thanks for your comments!
My answers are in **.... ** below.
------------------------------------------------------
Greg Kazz
EEISE Group Supervisor
Systems Engineering Section (Section 313)
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena CA 91109
MS 301-490
(818) 393-6529 (office)
------------------------------------------------------
From: "Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int
<mailto:Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int> " <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int
<mailto:Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int> >
Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2013 3:59 AM
To: "Kazz, Greg J (313B)" <greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov
<mailto:greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov> >
Subject: Quick comments for PICS: [Sls-slp] Proximity-1 Data Link
Specification for final SLP WG review
A few very quick comments.
Of course there may be more for similar cases.
regards
Gian Paolo
----------------------------------------------------
A2.2 PICS
Should DLL-1 better refer to 3.2.1 instead of 3.2?
** Yes 3.2.1 **
DLL-1 should be removed as individual subsections of 3.2 are addressed
and moreover DLL-1 as it stands now is incorrect/confusing as it
includes also options?
** We need users to comply with both 3.2.1 and 3.2.2. The subparts of
3.2.2. are useful to see because they contain valid values associated
with these parameters. **
Why the description of Option 1 is with lower case o (i.e. o.1 instead
of O.1 as in the table)? ** I think it was a typo. It was corrected as
all capital letters in my version **
Why DLL-61 is in bold? (this is not the only one in bold...) ** I
think this is Tom's way of showing a heading. **
Is it correct to mark all the items within e.g. 5.4 as optional? ** Yes
that was deliberately done by the WG **
If you read section 5.4, it contains mandatory requirements and options.
This was actually a case for conditional items as follows:
- DLL-63 / 5.4.2.1 Optional
- DLL-64 / 5.4.2.4 Mandatory if DLL-62 Supported
Is it correct giving up about conditional items in PICS? ** In this
case, yes **
Moreover
DLL-61 / 5.4 should not be listed as the individual requirements are
listed
DLL-63 should refer to 5.4.2.1 and not to 5.4.2 ** I agree, DLL-63
refers to 5.4.2.1 **
As section 5.4 is written, it is not visible that this feature is
optional ==> should 5.4.1 be made optional? ** yes **
PICS take - as expected - several pages.
Why not shortening some cases as e.g. DLL-52 / 5.2 ?
In other words why not having only a row for DLL-52 and removing the 8
following rows?
Alternatively why not indenting the following 8 row and using
identifiers as DLL-52.x?
** Up to Tom Gannett how best to deal with indexing or showing subsets
of information within the PICS **
** We could shorten the DLL PICS, however I tried to strike a compromise
between the shortest PICS Proforma possible vs conveying some redundancy
that helps the user check through the items by listing the key ones in
detail. If I hide too much information, people might have the tendency
to forget about it. Explicitly listing it (but not regurgatating the
entire text) seemed to be the best compromise **
**Thoughts from other SLP WG members ??? **
From:
"Kazz, Greg J (313B)" <greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov
<mailto:greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov> >
To:
"sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org> "
<sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org> >
Cc:
Thomas Gannett <tomg at aiaa.org <mailto:tomg at aiaa.org> >
Date:
20/08/2013 00:14
Subject:
[Sls-slp] Proximity-1 Data Link Specification for final SLP WG
review
Sent by:
sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org
<mailto:sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>
________________________________
Dear SLP WG members,
Tom Gannett has provided us now with a pre-approval version for the CESG
of the Proximity-1 Space Data Link Protocol.
Please review the attached documents and send me and Tom any comments
you have (redlines of the clean version would work, if you have the
bandwidth to send a 20 Megabyte file !) to me and Tom by Sept. 13.
There are two files in the CWE directory below. One is a red-lined
version so that you can see the changes made and also a clean version.
http://tinyurl.com/kzjz38z <http://tinyurl.com/kzjz38z>
Best regards,
Greg
------------------------------------------------------
Greg Kazz
EEISE Group Supervisor
Systems Engineering Section (Section 313)
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena CA 91109
MS 301-490
(818) 393-6529 (office)
------------------------------------------------------__________________
_____________________________
Sls-slp mailing list
Sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:Sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org>
http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/sls-slp
<http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/sls-slp>
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.
_______________________________________________
Sls-slp mailing list
Sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org
http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/sls-slp
<http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/sls-slp>
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.
This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this email,
you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor
copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you
believe you have received this email in error. QinetiQ may
monitor email traffic data and also the content of email for
the purposes of security. QinetiQ Limited (Registered in England
& Wales: Company Number: 3796233) Registered office: Cody Technology
Park, Ively Road, Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 0LX http://www.qinetiq.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-slp/attachments/20130919/be7a6bf5/attachment.html>
More information about the SLS-SLP
mailing list