[Sls-slp] FW: latest release of the LunaNet Interoperability Spec for your edification & amusement

[Shames, Peter M (US 312B)]

You guys might just want to take a look at this LunaNet interoperability Spec.  I’m concerned about the implications of this “Augmented Forward Signal”.

The lack of uptake of AMS is a little troubling too, but it is less central to the whole architecture than the space link is.

If you find anything that looks awry please let us all know what you see.

Thanks, Peter


From: Leigh Torgerson <jordan.l.torgerson at jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 at 9:46 AM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, Howie Weiss <Howard.Weiss at parsons.com>, Keith Scott <kscott at mitre.org>, Steve Lichten <stephen.m.lichten at jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: latest release of the LunaNet Interoperability Spec for your edification & amusement

Pretty weak – scant info on architecture, interface requirements or performance requirements..

https://esc.gsfc.nasa.gov/projects/TEMPO?tab=lunanet

they have a new “Augmented Forward Signal” service (because they realized that CCSDS / USLP can’t do CDMA or simultaneously access multiple users?)

also they talk about some an adaptation of Prox-1 to use S-band

they have invented a new “messaging” service that isn’t AMS; it merely defines various “standard” message types and formats, but doesn’t attempt to provide the publish & subscribe services that define AMS (which is still in the HLS specs, so there will be terminology and use conflicts ahead no doubt.)

Someone sat up all night thinking up Figure 7

our Nav people should look at the Nav section I expect.. at least they correctly recognize that PNT is orthogonal to SSI networking, as it all happens at the RF / PHY layer and has nothing to do with upper protocol layers. (Maybe we can finally put the “DTN might interfere with PNT” nonsense to rest?)

Synopsis: Someone said “Hey, take the famous drawing of all the lunar things talking to all the other lunar things, add DTN, invent broadcast multiple access link, let some mission ops people think up standard messages to send around like Amber Alerts, then shake the nav, coding, modulation and spectrum management people and see what falls out of their pockets, and put that all in a document and call it an “Interoperability Spec”.

If I was a lunar contractor, I’d know what radios to buy (but no info on required G/T, link performance, aperture size, etc.), and I know to fiddle around with DTN, and maybe hire some interns to bang out code to deal with their “messages”, but little else..




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-slp/attachments/20220803/24a4ff95/attachment.htm>