[Sls-slp] USLP capability of direct PDU insertion into Frame Data Field

[Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de]

Greg,
What I meant is the possible difference between the interfaces USLP - Higher layer protocol and Encaps - Higher layer protocol. In any case, I checked the encaps blue book and the current version of the USLP and there is no difference (if I'm not wrong) in the parameters passed with encaps.request and packet.request, respectively. Therefore, I guess that the higher layer protocols that required encaps can now (almost) seamlessly go over USLP.
Tomaso

------------------------
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR)
German Aerospace Center
Institute of Communications and Navigation | Satellite Networks | Oberpfaffenhofen | 82234 Wessling | Germany
Tomaso de Cola, Ph.D.
Telefon +49 8153 28-2156 | Telefax  +49 8153 28-2844 | tomaso.decola at dlr.de<mailto:tomaso.decola at dlr.de>
http://www.dlr.de/kn/institut/abteilungen/san

From: Kazz, Greg J (312B) [mailto:greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 17:55
To: Cola, Tomaso de
Cc: sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: Re: [Sls-slp] USLP capability of direct PDU insertion into Frame Data Field

Tomaso,

Our basic service primative for other protocols to use USLP is the packet primative. It is the same one we have been using for TM, AOS, TC except we also added a Protocol ID field to accommodate upper layer protocols. Do you see a problem with this approach ?
So yes, the I/F is different from AOS, TC, TM but only very slightly different by one parameter.

Regards,
Greg


From: "Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de<mailto:Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de>" <Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de<mailto:Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de>>
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 3:15 PM
To: "Kazz, Greg J (313B)" <greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov>>
Cc: "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>>
Subject: RE: [Sls-slp] USLP capability of direct PDU insertion into Frame Data Field

Hi Greg,
With this do you mean that "higher" layer protocol PDUs can be directly encapsulated into USLP, avoiding the use of the Encaps Service? If this is the case, I guess ( I don't remember right now) that the service primitives exposed to the upper layers (e.g., LTP or BP) will override the primitives currently offered by the Encaps service. On the contrary, if the primitives are different I'd say that the interface between USLP and the higher layer protocols will be different from the case where you have Encaps instead of USLP. Can you develop a bit more on this point?

Tomaso

------------------------
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR)
German Aerospace Center
Institute of Communications and Navigation | Satellite Networks | Oberpfaffenhofen | 82234 Wessling | Germany
Tomaso de Cola, Ph.D.
Telefon +49 8153 28-2156 | Telefax  +49 8153 28-2844 |tomaso.decola at dlr.de<mailto:tomaso.decola at dlr.de>
http://www.dlr.de/kn/institut/abteilungen/san

From: sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> [mailto:sls-slp-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Kazz, Greg J (312B)
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 18:06
To: sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [Sls-slp] USLP capability of direct PDU insertion into Frame Data Field

Dear SLP members,

Just as a reminder, the definition of the Protocol ID field within the USLP Transfer Frame Data Field Header allows for the capability of inserting CCSDS recognized PDUs directly into the data field I.e., data zone in USLP parlance of the frame. See Section 4.1.4.2 TRANSFER FRAME DATA FIELD HEADER


Thanks!Regards...Greg
G

Greg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-slp/attachments/20160127/829a159c/attachment.html>