[cssm] Service management levels

[Hugh Kelliher]

Hi Erik,



Starting at "Level 1" makes sense to me.



Best regards,

Hugh



From: SMWG <smwg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> On Behalf Of Barkley, Erik J (US
3970) via SMWG
Sent: 13 February 2025 20:01
To: CCSDS Service Mgmt WG <smwg at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [cssm] Service management levels



CSSM Colleagues,



Thinking a bit more about the different service management levels, it occurs
to me that maybe we don't want to call the most essential CCSDS
interoperability service management specifications "level 0", but really
rather "level 1" (level one). It occurs to me that our various organizations
already have service management implementations and in fact really level 0
(level zero) could be used as reference to current inter-operations whereby
interoperability is  bilaterally negotiated. I guess it is a question of
whether or not we want to draw this contrast. If we do then perhaps calling
current implementations level -1 (i.e. level negative/minus one) is not such
a good idea.  And I think at some point we will probably need to make such a
contrast. I realize this is essentially just semantics, and not anything
that really affects what we are working toward with the best practices, but
I think it is a consideration in how to present this to the various
implementing organizations.  Any thoughts on this?



Best regards,

-Erik

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/smwg/attachments/20250214/75a91971/attachment.htm>