From greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov Sun Sep 4 00:24:21 2016 From: greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov (Kazz, Greg J (312B)) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 00:24:21 +0000 Subject: [Sls-slp] CCSDS Fall 2016 Meetings and Planned Spring 2017 Meetings Message-ID: Dear SLP WG members, The following message is being forwarded to you from the CCSDS Secretariat. I am just making sure that you all have received it. FALL 2016 TECHNICAL PLENARY MEETING Hosted by ASI, the CCSDS Fall 2016 meeting series will be held at Agenzia Spaziale Italiana in Rome, Italy. The main technical meeting series will be held 17-21 October 2016 and will be followed by the CESG and CMC Meeting which will be held on Monday, 24 October 2016 through 26 October 2016. For details and to register, visit http://cwe.ccsds.org/fm/ProfileSDL/myProfile.aspx. Maps, hotel and other information are available at https://public.ccsds.org/meetings/2016Fall/default.aspx IMPORTANT: Please note the following instructions and process: 1) All Users must have a CWE login. If not, then you must request one: http://cwe.ccsds.org/ReqLogin.aspx Several of the links in this e-mail will prompt you for your CWE Login. 2) All Users must have a profile in order to even SEE/VIEW the "Register for the Fall 2016 Meetings" button. If you have not created a profile but have a CWE login, then you will be notified that you cannot register until you have filled out your profile. 3) After your meeting registration is submitted you will receive a confirmation e-mail, like in previous registrations, and you will also receive a URL which allows you to edit your registration. As always, registration to attend is required, but there are no required fees. During registration, you will be given the option to register for lunch and coffee to be provided for €60 for the entire week. Please be aware, if you do not choose to register for lunch and coffee for €60, you will be responsible for providing your own lunch and coffee which may only be found off-site of ASI; as such, this option is highly recommended for visitors. Due to logistics, this option cannot be prorated for visitors not staying the entire week. Registration will close on Monday, 3 October 2016, two weeks before the start of the technical meetings to provide sufficient time for final logistics planning at ASI. All attendees that require a Letter of Invitation for visa purposes should already have their letter. However, If you do not have a letter, please contact the Secretariat (Secretariat at mailman.ccsds.org) immediately so it can be arranged. Also, as always, dress for the Technical Plenary meeting is Business Casual. We look forward to seeing you in Rome, Italy. SPRING 2017 TECHNICAL PLENARY MEETING The Spring 2017 technical plenary and management meetings will be hosted by NASA/SwRI in San Antonio, Texas, USA. The technical meetings will be held from 8-12 May 2017 [Note: This will be a 5-day technical meeting]. The CESG Executive Committee will meet on Monday, 15 May 2017. The CMC will meet separately on 13-15 June in Russia, hosted by Roscosmos. Some preliminary information will be available after the Fall meetings. At the Fall 2016 meeting in Rome, we will be distributing the visa letters that will be needed for the Spring 2017 meeting in the US. If you need one to attend the Spring 2017 meeting, please inform the Secretariat (Secretariat at mailman.ccsds.org), or indicate this when registering online, so that we can bring one to you in Rome or mail it to you. CCSDS MEMBERSHIP, PARTICIPATION, IMPLEMENTATIONS Here are some reminders that are important whether or not you or your organization is going to attend a CCSDS meeting. If you are from a government agency that is not yet a CCSDS Observer Agency, you should consider getting your organization registered as a CCSDS Observer. Information is here: http://public.ccsds.org/participation/observer_agencies.aspx If you are from a private industry or academic organization that is involved (or interested) in CCSDS, but is not yet an Associate, you should consider registering your organization as a CCSDS Associate. Information is here: http://public.ccsds.org/participation/associates.aspx If your team is looking for software implementations that are publicly available, you should visit this page: http://public.ccsds.org/implementations/software.aspx If your team has developed software implementations that are publicly available, you should notify the Secretariat with info to post it on that same page: http://public.ccsds.org/implementations/software.aspx If your team has CCSDS implementations commercially available, you can have information about it posted on the CCSDS website, here: http://public.ccsds.org/implementations/products/products.aspx If you are explaining CCSDS to your organization, there are overview resources available here: http://public.ccsds.org/about/overview.aspx If you have any questions or comments, please email secretariat at mailman.ccsds.org. Looking forward to seeing you in Rome. Greg Kazz Chairman SLS-SLP WG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov Wed Sep 7 18:12:19 2016 From: greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov (Kazz, Greg J (312B)) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 18:12:19 +0000 Subject: [Sls-slp] Proposed Agenda for the Fall CCSDS SLP WG Meeting in Rome Message-ID: Dear SLP WG member, Attached is a proposed agenda for our upcoming Fall meeting in Rome from Oct 19-21. (SLP WG Agenda Rome) Please make sure you have registered on the CCSDS website for these meetings. See attachment. Let me know if you would like to add any changes to this agenda. Best regards and safe journey, Greg Kazz CCSDS SLS-SLP WG chairman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "The CCSDS-All mailing list is used by the CCSDS Secretariat to send out meeting and press releases related announcements." Subject: [Ccsds-all] Fall 2016 Technical Meetings - Rome, Italy - Registration Now Open Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:05:16 +0000 Size: 25808 URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SLP WG Agenda Rome Oct 19-20 2016.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 108366 bytes Desc: SLP WG Agenda Rome Oct 19-20 2016.docx URL: From greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov Mon Sep 12 20:43:03 2016 From: greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov (Kazz, Greg J (312B)) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:43:03 +0000 Subject: [Sls-slp] Questions about Proximity -1 space data link protocol In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Xiongwen He, As a member of NASA, I can answer any ambiguities you have with the CCSDS Proximity-1 Space Data Link standard. However, I cannot answer any questions concerning the implementation details of this CCSDS recommedation. However, I have included the entire Space Link Protocol (SCP) working group mailing list, in case any of the members would like to answer or comment on your implementation related questions. Please see my responses between **…** below. Best regards, Greg Kazz Chairman CCSDS SLS-SLP WG From: he xiongwen > Date: Saturday, September 10, 2016 at 2:52 AM To: "Kazz, Greg J (313B)" > Subject: Questions about Proximity -1 space data link protocol Dear Mr. Greg Kazz, I am from China Academy of Space Technology(CAST), and we are trying to adopt Proximity -1 space data link protocol to CAST standard.During the process, we find that some issues are not very clear, and I am looking for help from you. (1) In the Proximity -1 data link layer recommendation, there is a description as follows “6.2.3.9 RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER shall be used in the frame validation process to compare a received spacecraft ID value with that held within this buffer. This buffer may be loaded by a directive from the local vehicle controller, or it may be loaded with the spacecraft ID contained in the first valid received frame.” "6.7.2 FRAME VALIDATION c) If the Spacecraft ID field in the transfer frame header does not contain the value equal to the RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER for all frames received (i.e., Remote_Spacecraft_ID, MIB parameter) when the RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER is non-zero and the Source-or-Destination Identifier value equals ‘0’, i.e., source, and Test_Source is true, a session violation has occurred and the vehicle controller is notified (see annex D). When the RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER is zero and Test_Source is true, the value of the SCID field in the header of the first received frame whose Source-or-Destination ID is source is loaded into RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER and thereafter used for validation for the remainder of the session. (See also related 6.2.4.2.)" The question is: a) is RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER always equal to Remote_Spacecraft_ID, MIB parameter? ** Not necessarily. The test mentioned above still needs to be made. Depends upon the topology of the network involved. ** In a situation "When the RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER is zero and Test_Source is true, but the value of the SCID field in the header of the first received frame whose Source-or-Destination ID is source is not equal to Remote_Spacecraft_ID" will the SCID also be loaded to the RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER? If not, what actions will be taken? ** Yes. RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER is the recommended data store for this information ** b) Is the value Remote_Spacecraft_ID loaded to RECEIVING SCID BUFFER by using directive “SET RECEIVING SCID BUFFER” . ** Per paragraph 6.3.3.1.7 SET RECEIVING SCID BUFFER shall be used by the vehicle controller to load the RECEIVING_SCID_BUFFER. When the value of the SCID is known a priori, then the value in the Remote_Spacecraft_ID is used. When that value is not known a priori, then it can be determined by examining the SCID found in the first valid transfer frame received. . On what condition will this directive be used? ** see answer immediately above** (2) in Figure 5-1: Proximity Time Tag Recording Is Proximity Time Tag Recording process responsible for transfer the collection of tags to time Correlation Process? ** No. Please see note 5.3: NOTE When time correlation data sets canbe transferred, the time correlation process can be performed. The actual implementation details of this process are outside the scope of this specification. ** Do you have any examples of time Correlation Process, what do this process usually do ? ** I cannot provide you with implementation examples** Is Start Time Tag Collection Process command sent by ground or by on board process?** This is an implementation choice . No comment **When will the Initiator begin to collect the time tags? ** When the time tag activity is active I.e., once the initiator has built and sent the SET CONTROL PARAMETERS directive per paragraph 5.2.6 ** How do the initiator know the SET CONTROL PARAMETERS directive has been received by RESPONDER? ** Doesn’t absolutely know if it was or was not received. But it doesn’t matter to the initiator. It will only supply what it can supply. If it receives transfer frames from the responder than it will also time tag those frames as well as the ones it is transmitting. It is a best efforts activity as specified in chapter 5. ** (3) in Figure 5-2: Transferring Time to a Remote Asset Between"Extract the enterprise time from the TIME DISTRIBUTION directive providing it to the responder’s master clock" and the transfer of "TIME DISTRIBUTION directive", is there any delay? I see the two arrows are connect directly in the figure. ** The figure is only notional and per CCSDS figures in blue books are not normative. Clearly there will be a time delay between extracting the time and providing it in directive form ** is the action "Extract the enterprise time from the TIME DISTRIBUTION directive providing it to the responder’s master clock" implemented by proximity-1 protocol or upper layer application? ** I can only say that this function is not in the scope of Proximity-1 Space Data Link Protocol ** How does TIME DISTRIBUTION directive initiated ? By ground command or on board command? ** This is an implementation choice. No comment. ** I would appreciated if you could reply and help me clarify the questions. **Best regards, Greg Kazz ** Best Regards, Xiongwen He China Academy of Space Technology(CAST) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov Wed Sep 28 19:17:03 2016 From: greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov (Kazz, Greg J (312B)) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 19:17:03 +0000 Subject: [Sls-slp] =?big5?b?tarOYDogUXVlc3Rpb25zIGFib3V0IFByb3hpbWl0eSAt?= =?big5?b?MSBzcGFjZSBkYXRhIGxpbmsgcHJvdG9jb2w=?= Message-ID: Dear Xiongwen He, I have included both the SLP WG as well as the RF&Modulation WG for comment on your questions below. The Physical Layer of Proximity-1 was originally part of one blue book which also incorporated the synchronization and channel coding aspects as well. From a historical perspective, I can answer your questions. However, for the physical layer issues/questions please contact Enrico Vassallo who is the RFM WG chairman. For synchronization and channel coding issues/questions please contact Massimo Bertinelli, who is the Coding & Synchronization (C&S) WG chairman. From: he xiongwen > Date: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 7:20 AM To: "Kazz, Greg J (313B)" > Subject: 答复: Questions about Proximity -1 space data link protocol Dear Mr. Greg Kazz, I have some other questions about Proximity -1 space data link protocol-Physical layer. I hope you can help me. a) In 3.2.1 Table3-1 Why the modulation of E2d devices is different? What are microprobes? ** From a historical perspective, the prototypical E2d device we had in mind was a micro-probe. NASA sent a micro-probe to Mars called Deep Space 2 (DS-2), deployed from the Mars Polar Lander in 2000, which unfortunately failed to communicate. ** b) In 3.3.2.4.1 " The following three additional channels (fixed single forward and return frequency pairs) are defined for Proximity-1 operations: " Why is "additional" used? ** The first channel, channel 1 defined in the specification is the hailing channel. Additional means after this first channel, I.e., channels 0, 2, 3 in this case ** What's the use case for channel 4~7 and channel 8~15?** It is the job of the program or project to define these. Currently, no agency has found a need to provide a frequency assignment for these channels yet ** c) In 3.4.5.1 NOTES 1 The Doppler frequency rate does not include the Doppler rate required for tracking canister or worst-case spacecraft-to-spacecraft cases. Why doesn't The Doppler frequency rate include the two cases?** From a historical perspective, the Doppler freq. rate requirement was very generic and was assumed to meet most of the user’s use cases expect for very demanding performance cases such as tracking a canister or worst-case spacecraft-to-spacecraft tracking scenarios ** I would appreciated it if you could reply and help me clarify the questions. Best Regards, Xiongwen He China Academy of Space Technology(CAST) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: