[cssm] Review comments on the SMURF

[Barkley, Erik J (US 3970)]

Dear Colin,

Attached please find my comments on the SMURF draft recommended standard. Overall this is quite an impressive document and I think it is very close to being ready for agency review. Here is a summary of the more significant comments:


  1.  I think there is still some cleanup needed with regard to removal of the request for accounting report. Here and there it is still referenced but the main UML diagram and the report request UML specific diagrams have the accounting report removed which I think is just fine given that we are quite unlikely to produce any kind of definition for a standardized accountability report anytime soon.
  2.  There is still some leftover stuff with regard to the scenario sets which I think we all agreed we are not putting in the book so a bit of cleanup is needed there.
  3.  For a few of the parameter descriptions there are essentially usage consideration notes rather than a direct description of the parameter itself. It strikes me that we could either collect these notes in a usage considerations Annex or move the note like material in the description into specific notes about usage consideration where this occurs (i.e. essentially in line with the parameter table entry). In either case, I think this then would make the description entries more in line with CCSDS "terse style" pedantic as it may be.
  4.  Optional use of start and end times for requests seems odd to me - for example, a request for communication geometry (Communications Planning Information Format) seems like it would have to be bounded in time.  This might need further explanation if these values are optional and/or perhaps they should be mandatory?
  5.  Location of the XML Instance examples:  the CPIF calls out the github repository directly; I am okay with the a SANA GitHub repository registry as indicated by the SMURF, but if we are to do that I think we need to add a description of the registry (simple though it may be) and start working with the SANA guys to get it into place.

Well, that's it.  What do you think?

Best regards,
-Erik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/smwg/attachments/20220210/b400b77d/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 902x9w0_19 - ServiceManagementUtilizationRequestFormats-eb.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 3726848 bytes
Desc: 902x9w0_19 - ServiceManagementUtilizationRequestFormats-eb.doc
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/smwg/attachments/20220210/b400b77d/attachment-0001.doc>