[Smwg] RE: [Css-csts] Facility Identifier (or StationRef?)

[John Pietras]

Good point, Peter. I'll back off on my suggestion that we need a common term across all 3 documents, and just leave it as being that the Service Request/Service Package book has to somehow address the assignment of the facility identifier for purposes of identification of CSTS service instances. Erik is putting together an "Inter-Recommendation Tracking" spreadsheet that could be used to record the "lien" on the Service Request/Service Package book.

Regarding SANA registration - I agree. Colin is already looking into standard, registered station IDs for the Simple Schedule book; a generalization to various types of facilities is a reasonable extrapolation.

John

From: Shames, Peter M (312B) [mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 3:03 PM
To: John Pietras; CCSDS_CSTSWG (css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org); CCSDS SMWG ML (smwg at mailman.ccsds.org)
Subject: Re: [Css-csts] Facility Identifier (or StationRef?)

Strikes me that there may be other sorts of facilities thatn "stations", such as network control centers, mission control centers, and the like.  Maybe there needs to be some sort of taxonomy and also a SANA registry of these items.  I think we also need to associate those facilities with the organization that owns and operates them.  I think that Nav WG has a similar issue and that some sort of common, global, registry(s) need to be defined.

Peter


From: John Pietras <john.pietras at gst.com<mailto:john.pietras at gst.com>>
Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:08 AM
To: CSTS-WG <css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org>>, SMWG <smwg at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:smwg at mailman.ccsds.org>>
Subject: [Css-csts] Facility Identifier (or StationRef?)

CSTSWG and CSSMWG colleagues ---
The CSTS SFW defines (in section 3.4.2.2.7.2) the service-instance-identifier as comprising 4 components, one of which is "the facility identifier as defined by the service package specified in references [2] and [1]", where reference 1 is the SCCS SM Service Request and Service Package Data Formats Recommended Standard that the CSSMWG is currently developing.

As far as I know, we in the CSSMWG have not progressed the content of the book to specifically identify a "facility identifier". However, the Simple Schedule Format book that is working its way through CESG and CMC approval for Red-1 release does define a stationRef parameter (defined as "The ground station or relay satellite to which the scheduled activity applies")  that appears to contain the same type of identification intended by the CSTS SFW's facility identifier. So in SM we have adopted the concept of associating the delivery of services with a specific facility or station. We in the CSSMWG need to make sure that this identification is also present in the Service Package format (schema) defined in the SCCS SM Service Request and Service Package Data Formats Blue Book.

Assuming that will happen, I recommend that we adopt a common term across all three books (CSTS SFW, Simple Schedule, and  Service Request/Service Package). As noted above, CSTS SFW uses 'facility identifier" and the Simple Schedule book uses "stationRef". I personally don't have any preference for one or the other, just a belief that a single name should be used for simplicity and clarity.

Best regards,
John

________________________________

Spam<https://filter.gst.com/canit/b.php?i=01N97bAr1&m=b1854bc8115e&c=s>
Not spam<https://filter.gst.com/canit/b.php?i=01N97bAr1&m=b1854bc8115e&c=n>
Forget previous vote<https://filter.gst.com/canit/b.php?i=01N97bAr1&m=b1854bc8115e&c=f>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/smwg/attachments/20141029/3141915c/attachment.html>