[SOIS-WIR] [EXTERNAL] Re: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Mon Oct 25 15:04:21 UTC 2021

Dear Jean-Luc,

I am glad that you have brought this issue specifically to the attention of Ignacio and Gilles, for they are the SLS AD and DAD.   All issues of handling link layer protocols, codes, modulations, and frequency assignments would normally, for every other CCSDS project, have been handled in the SLS Area.

What we are, in fact, dealing with here is a sort of anomaly in how this specific project got allocated.  The SOIS requested that this WiFi and 3GPP project be handled within SOIS, in the SOIS WIR WG.  The reasoning was that since, in this context, these protocols are intended to be used in locations remote from Earth, and in some cases onboard, inside, or in the area around spacecraft, that they should be handled in SOIS.  I, and others in CESG, were worried that this assignment of responsibility for a Link Layer protocol to SOIS would cause some parallel work that was possibly divergent, to occur.  It seems that is exactly what is occurring.

In the normal scheme of things when RFM issues appear in CCSDS they are handled in the RFM WG in the SLS Area.   This is the WG that has the expertise to deal with these issues, and they have members who are tied into the formal, international, organizations like the SFCG and the ITU that define the international agreements in this domains.  And they have the CCSDS standard that formally documents these concerns across all of CCSDS.  In all other WGs, both in SLS and elsewhere, this is understood and other WG bring their frequency and modulation issues to SLS RFM to be formalized.  This occurs as the normal way that CCSDS does business.  In SLS it is just a matter of course.  In other CCSDS WGs, such as SEA D-DOR WG, where new DOR signaling was required for higher precision plane of sky accuracy, the newly required RF tone signals were also brought to RFM WG for standardization.  This is the way that CCSDS is intended to work.  The same approach should be the case here.

Please note that no one is disputing the need for the kinds of limiting statements or constraints that you are requesting.  CCSDS must conform to all of the relevant international agreements and constraints.  As someone who had worked in the radio astronomy community for a number of years I am acutely aware of their concerns.   That said, the location in CCSDS literature where these must be formally documented is in the RFM WG documents.   This is where such concerns belong.

I do agree that it is appropriate to put some text in the WiFi / 3GPP document, in the introductory / descriptive sections, stating that there are international level concerns that must be addressed in using such components as part of deploying systems in space.  That sort of warning, or caveat, is appropriate.  But at that point the document should point to the sections of the RFM document where such issues are formally handled and documented.  It is just not appropriate within the CCSDS context to scatter formal requirements like these about in parts of many other documents.

That was the intent of my PIDs and I stand behind that.

Very best regards, Peter

From: Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>
Date: Monday, October 25, 2021 at 2:16 AM
To: Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>, "sois-wir at mailman.ccsds.org" <sois-wir at mailman.ccsds.org>, "Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez at esa.int" <Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez at esa.int>, Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, Tom Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
Cc: Ray Wagner <raymond.s.wagner at nasa.gov>, Gilles Moury <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear all,

I put Gilles Moury (in CC) in the Loop (with the attachments of my message bellow to our Wireless Working Group)

Very best regards

Jean-Luc

De : Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>
Envoyé : dimanche 24 octobre 2021 17:21
À : Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>; sois-wir at mailman.ccsds.org; Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez at esa.int; Shames, Peter M (US 312B) <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>; CCSDS Secretariat <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
Cc : Ray Wagner <raymond.s.wagner at nasa.gov>; Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>
Objet : Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

[+ Peter Shames, + Thomas Gannett]
________________________________
From: Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr<mailto:Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:41 AM
To: sois-wir at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sois-wir at mailman.ccsds.org> <sois-wir at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sois-wir at mailman.ccsds.org>>; Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez at esa.int<mailto:Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez at esa.int> <Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez at esa.int<mailto:Ignacio.Aguilar.Sanchez at esa.int>>; Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Subject: TR: [EXTERNAL] Re: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear CCSDS Wireless Working Group,

I would like to share some informations in case everyone in our WG would be not fully aware of, regarding 883 standard submited to CESG.   I include you in the diffusion list Ignacio, since you participated to some Agency Review discussions in our WG. These informations are contained in the correspondance bellow and in the attachements.

As you could see, the majority of our agency review updated texts are proposed to be removed, that is most of the spectrum texts. As a reminder, this is not “proposed CNES text” as written bellow, but text proposed by our overall Working Group* to process the CNES Agency Review RIDs (that is most of the RIDS of the Agency Review). There is therefore not any more consensus in our WG for the moment.

To better check the importance of the texts which are proposed to be removed, you could see the attached 3 CESG RIDS of Peter Shames proposing to remove these full texts (these RIDS are available on CWE, as all the CESG RIDS, on the form of PIDs). In the attached RIDs, I added my simple personnal opinion just to share it in our WG for transparency, knowing these issues are now delt by CESG and then by CMC.

Thank you for your consideration of this message; see you soon.

Very best regards

Jean-Luc

*for exemple, the full text proposed to be removed in PID SEA 009 883 is a text from DLR, which allowed to our WG to find consensus on this part.

From: Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 11:07 AM
To: Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr<mailto:Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>>
Cc: Moury Gilles <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr<mailto:Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>>; CCSDS Secretariat <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net<mailto:thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>>; Shames, Peter M (JPL-312B)[JPL Employee] <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>>; Teodomante Sylvain <Sylvain.Teodomante at cnes.fr<mailto:Sylvain.Teodomante at cnes.fr>>; Wagner, Raymond S. (JSC-EV811) <raymond.s.wagner at nasa.gov<mailto:raymond.s.wagner at nasa.gov>>; Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear Jean-Luc -

CESG Review of CCSDS-883-0-R-0 mandated removing any and all spectrum recommendations sans the statement, "For spectrum allocation missions must coordinate with the responsible entities (SFCG, ITU)".

-- The SOIS-WIR WG must adhere to the CESG guidance per CCSDS rules

-- All of the previously proposed CNES text regarding spectrum requirements has been removed

As a result, and per CESG guidance/mandates, all inserted CNES verbiage concerning spectrum allocation requirements and constraints is out of scope for CCSDS-883-0-R-0.

Kevin

________________________________

From: Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr<mailto:Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 10:05 PM
To: Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Cc: Moury Gilles <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr<mailto:Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>>; Teodomante Sylvain <Sylvain.Teodomante at cnes.fr<mailto:Sylvain.Teodomante at cnes.fr>>
Subject: RE: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear Kevin,

May I kindly remind you to answer to our question bellow ?

Thank you very much; VBR

Jean-Luc

De : Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Envoyé : lundi 4 octobre 2021 05:15
À : Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr<mailto:Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>>
Cc : Moury Gilles <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr<mailto:Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>>; Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Objet : Re: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear Jean-Luc -

I confirm I have received your update proposal.  Please let me review and discuss with NASA and CSA this upcoming week.

Thanks.

Kevin

________________________________

From: Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr<mailto:Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 11:53 AM
To: Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Cc: Moury Gilles <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr<mailto:Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>>
Subject: RE: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear Kevin,

Sorry for the blank/empty part in my E-mail

The CNES update proposal is in the joint extract of the 883 Blue Book

What do you think about this proposal please ?

VBR

Jean-Luc

De : Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Envoyé : vendredi 1 octobre 2021 16:33
À : Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr<mailto:Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>>
Cc : Moury Gilles <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr<mailto:Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>>; Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Objet : Re: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear Jean-Luc -

From your email below I cannot "see" any text (it is blank/empty) for Page 2-11, Page 3-3, Page 3-4, Page 3-5.

Can you "cut-and-paste" the associated paragraphs and highlight where you are suggesting the updates please?

Thanks!

Kevin

________________________________

From: Issler Jean-Luc <Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr<mailto:Jean-Luc.Issler at cnes.fr>>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 12:20 AM
To: Kevin K Gifford <kevin.gifford at colorado.edu<mailto:kevin.gifford at colorado.edu>>
Cc: Moury Gilles <Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr<mailto:Gilles.Moury at cnes.fr>>
Subject: A proposal for CCSDS 883 standard

Dear Kevin,

We had discussions in CNES, and wondered it would be not too late  to propose in the upcomming 883 Blue Book the replacement of the word “communication” by the word “communication and navigation” or “communication/navigation”, in the following paragraphs of the book. This would be consistent with SFCG 32-2R2 which allocate the concerned band for these 2 services.

What do you think about this request please ? Sorry for this late question; Have a nice day.

Best regards

Jean-Luc

Page 2-11 :

[cid:image001.png at 01D7C976.EA5F3170]

Page 3-3 :

[cid:image002.png at 01D7C976.EA5F3170]

Page 3-4 :

[cid:image003.png at 01D7C976.EA5F3170]

(…)

[cid:image004.png at 01D7C976.EA5F3170]

Page 3-5 :

  [cid:image005.png at 01D7C976.EA5F3170]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sois-wir/attachments/20211025/2ac7195b/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 17128 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sois-wir/attachments/20211025/2ac7195b/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 34977 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sois-wir/attachments/20211025/2ac7195b/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 14368 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sois-wir/attachments/20211025/2ac7195b/attachment-0007.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18910 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sois-wir/attachments/20211025/2ac7195b/attachment-0008.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 35392 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sois-wir/attachments/20211025/2ac7195b/attachment-0009.png>