[Sls-slp] RE: Results of CESG Polls closing 14 August 2015
Moury Gilles
Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr
Thu Aug 20 07:53:35 UTC 2015
Dear Greg,
I agree with the proposed modifications. I have just corrected 2 typos in the attached file (p1-1, 4-5)
Best regards,
Gilles
Gilles MOURY
CNES Toulouse
De : Kazz, Greg J (312B) [mailto:greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov]
Envoyé : mercredi 19 août 2015 20:25
À : sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org
Cc : Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int; Moury Gilles
Objet : FW: Results of CESG Polls closing 14 August 2015
Dear SLP WG,
Attached please find the updated CCSDS 130.2-G-2.1 Space Data Link Protocols - Summary of Concept and Rationale Green Book. I concur with Peter Shames' comments which are identified in blue in the attachment.
Please let me know if you have any concerns or comments with this update by Sept. 2. Otherwise, I will assume you approve of this update.
I would like to move forward with it so that the secretariat can process it along with the other approved SLP changes to TM, TC, AOS space data link blue books.
Best regards,
Greg
From: <Shames>, "Peter M (312B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Date: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 11:07 AM
To: "Kazz, Greg J (313B)" <greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov>>, "Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de<mailto:Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de>" <Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de<mailto:Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de>>
Cc: "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>>, Thomas Gannett <tomg at aiaa.org<mailto:tomg at aiaa.org>>, "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>>, "cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>" <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: Re: Results of CESG Polls closing 14 August 2015
Hi Greg,
I have reviewed your notes and the edited version of the document that you provided. In general I am in agreement with all of the changes you have proposed and noted in the PDF.
In reading over the Word version to see the actual changes I found some minor points that I thought needed further clarification. As a result I have used Track Changes to provide some further suggestions for clarification. If you and the WG accept these I think we have closure.
Best regards, Peter
From: Greg Kazz <Greg.J.Kazz at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Greg.J.Kazz at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 4:45 PM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>, "Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de<mailto:Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de>" <Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de<mailto:Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de>>
Cc: Gian Paolo Calzolari <Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int<mailto:Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int>>, Tom Gannett <tomg at aiaa.org<mailto:tomg at aiaa.org>>, "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>>, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec <cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: Re: Results of CESG Polls closing 14 August 2015
Dear Peter and Tomaso,
Attached please find 2 files. The first is an updated Word document that
contains my ³purple lines² changes to the Space Data Link
Protocols-Summary of Concept and Rationale CCSDS 130.2-G-2.1 with
dispositions to your ³RIDs². Thank you very much for all of your
thoughtful comments. It has made the Green book much more robust.
The second pdf file contains answers to Peter¹s questions within the
comment bubbles using the reply feature.
Regards,
Greg
On 8/17/15, 1:27 PM, "Thomas Gannett" <tomg at aiaa.org<mailto:tomg at aiaa.org>> wrote:
Greg:
The CESG approval polls for the SLS link layer updates concluded with
conditional approval (conditions are stated below). Approval
conditions for the specifications themselves are minor; Peter's
conditions for approval of the Green Book appear to be somewhat more
involved (his markup of the PDF file is attached).
I suggest you respond directly to Peter and Tomaso (don't worry about
the issue-number conditions) with your proposed dispositions, CCing
me and cesg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:cesg at mailman.ccsds.org>. When agreement on the dispositions
exists, I'll update the files per the dispositions.
Tom
At 03:37 PM 8/17/2015, CCSDS Secretariat wrote:
CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2015-07-002 Approval to publish CCSDS
132.0-B-2, TM Space Data Link Protocol (Blue Book, Issue 2)
Results of CESG poll beginning 31 July 2015 and ending 14 August 2015:
Abstain: 0 (0%)
Approve Unconditionally: 7 (77.78%) (Merri, Behal, Scott,
Calzolari, Moury, Suess, Barton)
Approve with Conditions: 2 (22.22%) (Shames, Cola)
Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:
Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This is approved with one
condition: Add references to the SCCS-ADD (CCSDS 901.0-G) and
SCCS-ARD (901.1-M) to section 2.1.1 Architecture where the OSCP is
also included.
Also, note that the term "payload", which is used (inconsistently)
in the SDLS document (CCSDS 355x0b) does not appear anywhere in this
document.
However, Figure 6-1 does make the relationships among User Data,
Transfer Frame Data Field, and Security Header and Trailer quite
clear without using this term.
Keith Scott (Approve Unconditionally): In principle I concur with
Tomaso that the reference to the SDLS book should be updated to
reflect the published version of the SDLS Blue Book (provided that
the SDLS Blue Book is approved in the same round of polling as TM).
This assumes that there are no substantive differences between the
draft SDLS book referenced here and the final SDLS book, which I
believe is the case; however, a comment on this by the Security WG
might be useful.
--keith
Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions): I would suggest to update
reference (normative) 10, so that issue 1, instead of issue 0
appears. Obviously, the "code" of the referenced CCSDS book should
be updated accordingly as well.
Total Respondents: 9
No response was received from the following Area(s):
CSS
SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after
conditions have been addressed
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2015-07-003 Approval to publish CCSDS
232.0-B-3, TC Space Data Link Protocol (Blue Book, Issue 3)
Results of CESG poll beginning 31 July 2015 and ending 14 August 2015:
Abstain: 0 (0%)
Approve Unconditionally: 7 (77.78%) (Merri, Behal, Scott,
Calzolari, Moury, Suess, Barton)
Approve with Conditions: 2 (22.22%) (Shames, Cola)
Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:
Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This is approved with one
condition: Add references to the SCCS-ADD (CCSDS 901.0-G) and
SCCS-ARD (901.1-M) to section 2.1.1 Architecture where the OSCP is
also included.
Also, note that the term "payload", which is used (inconsistently)
in the SDLS document (CCSDS 355x0b) does not appear anywhere in this
document.
However, Figure 6-1 does make the relationships among User Data,
Transfer Frame Data Field, and Security Header and Trailer quite
clear without using this term.
Keith Scott (Approve Unconditionally): In principle I concur with
Tomaso that the reference to the SDLS book should be updated to
reflect the published version of the SDLS Blue Book (provided that
the SDLS Blue Book is approved in the same round of polling as TC).
This assumes that there are no substantive differences between the
draft SDLS book referenced here and the final SDLS book, which I
believe is the case; however, a comment on this by the Security WG
might be useful.
--keith
Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions): As stated for TM book, the
reference to SDLS blue book should be with issue 1, instead of 0.
Total Respondents: 9
No response was received from the following Area(s):
CSS
SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after
conditions have been addressed
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2015-07-004 Approval to publish CCSDS
732.0-B-3, AOS Space Data Link Protocol (Blue Book, Issue 3)
Results of CESG poll beginning 31 July 2015 and ending 14 August 2015:
Abstain: 0 (0%)
Approve Unconditionally: 8 (88.89%) (Merri, Behal, Scott, Cola,
Calzolari, Moury, Suess, Barton)
Approve with Conditions: 1 (11.11%) (Shames)
Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:
Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This is approved with one
condition: Add references to the SCCS-ADD (CCSDS 901.0-G) and
SCCS-ARD (901.1-M) to section 2.1.1 Architecture where the OSCP is
also included.
Also, note that the term "payload", which is used (inconsistently)
in the SDLS document (CCSDS 355x0b) does not appear anywhere in this
document.
However, Figure 6-1 does make the relationships among User Data,
Transfer Frame Data Field, and Security Header and Trailer quite
clear without using this term.
Keith Scott (Approve Unconditionally): In principle I concur with
Tomaso that the reference to the SDLS book should be updated to
reflect the published version of the SDLS Blue Book (provided that
the SDLS Blue Book is approved in the same round of polling as AOS).
This assumes that there are no substantive differences between the
draft SDLS book referenced here and the final SDLS book, which I
believe is the case; however, a comment on this by the Security WG
might be useful.
--keith
Tomaso de Cola (Approve Unconditionally): As stated for the TM book,
the reference to SDLS blue book should be with issue 1, instead of 0.
Total Respondents: 9
No response was received from the following Area(s):
CSS
SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after
conditions have been addressed
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2015-07-005 Approval to publish CCSDS
130.2-G-3, Space Data Link Protocols-Summary of Concept and
Rationale (Green Book, Issue 3)
Results of CESG poll beginning 31 July 2015 and ending 14 August 2015:
Abstain: 0 (0%)
Approve Unconditionally: 6 (75%) (Merri, Behal, Calzolari, Moury,
Suess, Barton)
Approve with Conditions: 2 (25%) (Shames, Cola)
Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:
Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This document still needs a
significant amount of work. Here are the major issues:
1) It talks about the role of Service Providers in a number of
places, but the SLE interfaces, and the role of space data service
providers, is essentially ignored. The only SLE service that is
included is FSP, CLTU, RAF and RCF are all left out, a major omission.
2) Prox-1 is left out, but spacecraft to spacecraft links are
mentioned in several places. This tends to suggest that these links
should be serviced by TC & TM, which is not typically the best approach.
3) AOS is described only in the context of audio and video services,
its use for high rate data links is not even mentioned.
4) RASDS diagrams are used throughout, but there is no reference
made to RASDS (CCSDS 311.0-M). References should also be made to the
SCCS-ADD (CCSDS 901.0-G) and the SCCS-ARD (CCSDS 901.1-M). These
documents provide the best context for understanding the
relationships among all of these SLS protocols and the CSS services.
5) The treatment of COP, FOP, FARM is a little uneven and no mention
is made of LTP as a means to assure reliable delivery of link layer data.
6) The only "network" protocols that are mentioned are SPP (and a
little about Encap). There is not mention of other CCSDS upper layer
protocols like LTP, CFDP, AMS, IP or DTN. These application layer
and network layer protocols are a part of CCSDS and their
relationship to the link layer should be made clear.
Tomaso de Cola (Approve with Conditions): Three comments:
1) reference to SDLS (reference [21]) should be updated to issue 1.
2) In section 2 it is stated that proximity-1 is out of the scope of
the book, because a separated green book is already available about
proximity-1. I'd place a similar statement also in section 1.2,
where actually the scope of the book is established.
3) In section 5.2, it is mentioned that proximity-1 does not have
specific security requirements. Since the book does not address
Proximity-1, I would drop this consideration.
Total Respondents: 8
No response was received from the following Area(s):
CSS
SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after
conditions have been addressed
Thomas Gannett
+1 443 472 0805
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-slp/attachments/20150820/8530b8b6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 130x2g21_CESG_Approval_GJK-SEA GM.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 462336 bytes
Desc: 130x2g21_CESG_Approval_GJK-SEA GM.doc
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-slp/attachments/20150820/8530b8b6/attachment.doc>
More information about the SLS-SLP
mailing list