Document Sample
SMWG-ClosingPlenaryReport-19-Jan-2007 Powered By Docstoc
					SMWG Closing Plenary Report

         Erik Barkley
         Chair, SMWG

        CSSA Workshop
     Colorado Springs, USA
      15 -- 19 January 2007

1.   Goals for Winter 2007 Colorado Springs Meetings
2.   Summary of achievement/decisions with respect to goals
3.   Workplan for next ~8 months
4.   Deliverables status

                  Recap: Goals at Opening of Meeting

•   Dispose of remaining RIDS for Red-1
•   Review and adjust priorities for items to be included in Red-2
•   Review conceptual analyses
     – Including potential restructuring of Red-2
•   Achieve agreement on Red-2 production plan
     – Estimate effort required
     – Estimate available resources
•   Achieve agreement on (what if anything we can do within the next 9
    months for) Concept of operations (Green Book) production plan
•   Achieve agreement on prototype interoperation plans
     – Estimate effort required
     – Estimate available resources
     – Identify prototype POCs

                Dispose of remaining RIDS for Red-1

•   Goal achieved
    – Deferred RIDS examined and status changed to accepted or rejected as
    – RIDS with actionees of TBD properly assigned

              Review and adjust priorities for Red-2 (1/2)

•   Goal Achieved: Review with respect to consolidated items/issues from
    Rome meetings accomplished
     – See results on following slide
     – Technical dependencies may preclude the ordering of priorities from being
       strictly observed
         • For example, the inclusion of “higher level” configuration profiles facilitates
           inclusion of other priorities such as management of off-line transfer services
         • Issue of work plan ordering with respect to priorites is somewhat moot due to the
           fact that it appears that all of the issues, with the exception of inclusion of
           management for ranging and radiometric services, can be addressed by
           September 2007

                                         Review and adjust priorities for Red-2 (2/2)
                                                  Results of SMWG Poll

                                                                Agency Need/Prioirty Scoring For Red-2

   Significant Changes for Red-2            BNSC    CNES   DLR         ESA      INPE      JAXA    NASA-GSFC NASA-JPL Average    High
Support for "Standing Orders" and
Generic Scheduling                           4.5     4.5    5          4.5                               4.5   4       4.5        5
(PropseServicePackage Operation)
Management of Ranging and
                                             4        4     3           4                   4            4     4.5     3.9       4.5
Radiometric Services
Management of Off-line transfer
                                             2       4.5    5          4.5                  3            4.5   4       3.9        5
                                             4        3     3          4.5                  5            4     4       3.9        5
Service Package State Diagrams
Greater ability to specify default
information                                  5        3     2           2                                5     4       3.5        5
("Higher-Level" Configuration Profile)
                                             4        3     1           4                   4            4     4.5     3.5       4.5
Definition of Support Levels

Capability to override configuration         3        3     3           4                                4.5   3.5     3.5       4.5
parameters on service package basis
Trajectory Submission Process
                                             4.5      4     2           2                                4.5   2       3.2       4.5
Allow for event sequenc information to
be expressed bilaterally (Event              1        3     2           3                   4            1     5       2.7        5
Sequence Remodelling)
Splitting Up the Recommendation              3        3     2           2                                2     3       2.5        3

1  No need now, no need envisioned for the future
2  May prove to be desirable, may be useful to study for future action
3  Interesting, should be addressed eventually, but can live without it for Blue Book
4  Desirable, would prefer that this be addressed in Red-2, not absolutely required for Red-2, but required for Blue Book
5  Required, agency needs this for Red-2 (and Blue Book)
                       Review of Conceptual Analyses (1/4)

•   Goals achieved with respect to the following analyses:
     1. General capability for allowing configuration profile modifications on a per service
        package basis
          •   Originally discussed as part of “EIRP Offsets” analysis
                •   Agreed to fold this in as part of a more general capability
          •   General approach (summary of analysis that occurred during meetings)
                •   Add information to service agreement that indicates if this capability is to be supported
                •   Add a data set to CSP/RSP-I indicating parameter to be modified wrt to service package
                        • Cardinality to allow multiple of these data sets to be stated
                •   Validation rules and error diagnostics to be stated as appropriate (ie in concert with validation criteria for
                    configuration profiles)
                •   Real world mapping envisioned via Xpath, value pairing
                        • Facilitated by adoption of Composite Carrier Profiles
     2. Composite Carrier Profiles (aka “Higher-level” configuration profiles)
          •   Refer to J. Pietras’ briefing
          •   Agreed to attempt to find better naming rather than “component carrier”, “composite carrier”
              (editor’s note: we may wish to try and find terms that have operational significance)
          •   The service package configuration profile override mechanism presented is now assumed to
              be part of the general capability cited in 1

     3. Event Sequence Remodeling
          •   Refer to E. Barkley’s write-up
          •   (Editor’s note: would be a good idea to revisit analysis to see about stating event sequences
              at a level commensurate with the composite carrier profile)

                      Review of Conceptual Analyses (2/4)

•   Goals achieved with respect to the following analyses (Cont’d)
     4. Propose Service Package Operation
          •   Refer to J. Pietras’ briefing
          •   Agreed to revise semantics of sleSmCreatorName “ownership” to be on a per operation basis
          •   Agreed to simplify the approach by disallowing modifications of the PSP-SR (wrt to the PSP-I)
              from UM to CM
                •   PSP-SR reflects either acceptance or rejection of PSP-I
                •   UM has the option of RSP operation if subsequent modification required
     5. Inclusion of State Table diagrams
          •   Refer to A. Crowson’s write-up
          •   Agreed to revise terms such that name of states align more with repsect to current red book
                •   E.g, “mutable” (which does not appear in the recommendation) vs. “pending”
     6. CCSDS 401 Spacelink Parameters
          •   Mission modulation types from CCSDS 401 will be added to Red-2
          •   Deficiencies in tune in patterns parameters noted (for forward carrier)
                •   Multiple “legs” of the sweep pattern may occur beyond those allowed for in the current recommendation
                •   Dwell times are not specified currently
                •   Agreed to address this via the following approach:
                       • Revise current single leg parameters to include dwell time
                       • Revise the definition of the forward carrier sleep pattern to allow for multiple tune-in legs to be
                            stated (ie state cardinality such that multiplicity is allowed)
          •   Forward subcarrier frequency definition is to be allowed to be more flexible by stating this
              without the restriction to 8000 or 16000 Hz
                •   Changes to both the configuration profile and service agreement sections

                     Review of Conceptual Analyses (3/4)

•   Goals achieved with respect to the following analyses (Cont’d)
     7. Management of Off-line transfer services
         •   Refer to J. Pietras’ presentation
         •   Agreed to consider capture of service package information so that operational
             context of data be transferred off-line is known
               •   (Editor’s note: this hints at service package remaining in some TBD state)
         •   Agreed to consider simplification of concept by having a single dataSinkProfile as
             opposed to separate profiles for RAF vs. RCF
         •   Concept needs to consider return of datastore identifier (in C/RSP-SR) to allow for
             implementations that distribute data storage at multiple ground stations,
             especially if antenna selection is deferred to CM
     8. Support Levels
         •   Agreed to approach whereby
               •   Service Agreement contains list of support levels (in similar fashion as that used for
                   defining creator names)
               •   Service Package invocation can site one of these support levels
               •   Semantics of various support levels are defined on a bilateral basis – ie recommendation
                   does not state any requirements with respects to support levels other than validation of a
                   service package stated support level being one of those identified in the service

                      Review of Conceptual Analyses (4/4)

•   Goals achieved with respect to the following analyses (Cont’d)
     9. Revised Trajectory Prediction Processes
          •   Refer to J. Pietras’ presentation
          •   Agreed to attempt to revise the concept so that the ANT operation could be modified/re-used
              rather than introduce AAT (Apply Altnernate Trjaectory) operation
     10. Splitting the recommendation
          •   Refer to J. Pietras’ presentation
          •   Concerns noted about increasing overall page count (among multiple books)
          •   Agreed to forego splitting the book up in the near-term in preference to producing updates
•   Goal Not Achieved with respect to the following analyses
     1. Management of ranging/radiometric services
          •   Sufficient analysis not available for review
          •   Various ranging approaches/mechanisms identified
                •   PN Ranging for CDMA; PN Ranging for Residual Carrier; Tone Ranging, Sequential Ranging
                •   Appears that current CCSDS standards address the latter three types
          •   Various ranging approaches differ with respect to being fixed for entire agencies ground
              network versus being fixed with respect to the service agreement level versus dynamic behavior
              on a per service package basis
          •   Preliminary identification of point of attachment for ranging parameters on a per carrier profile
              basis was performed
          •   Radiometric service management was not significantly discussed
          •   Further analysis to be performed and available by May for subsequent decision as to inclusion
              for Red-2

        Concept of Operations/Green Book Production Plan

•   Goal was not directly address during the meetings
•   Agreed to at least remove section 2 from Red-1 recommendation as
    the draft Green book

                     Prototype Interoperations Plans

•   Goal Achieved
    – Refer to E. Barkley’s presentation on plan outline for SLE services
      management prototype interoperations
    – Also refer to T. Yoshitaka’s and Y. Nobuhiro’s presentation on JAXA’s SLE
      SM prototype development
    – Interface verification test plans to be produced by April
    – Shadow track test plans to be produced by July
        • Members of the working group will need to coordinate with appropriate
          parties/organizations in mission operations for proper coordination of shadow
          tracking activities
    – Prototype interoperations to generally occur April through September

                                         Production Plans

•   Goal Achieved
    – Refer to Detailed Microsoft Project file developed
    – Schedule summarized in the following table

                                     Activity                                     Date

    Conceptual Analysis for inclusion of management of Ranging and      May 07
    Radiometric services

    Draft Operations Concept Book (Green Book)                          May 07

    Intermediate Meeting (Red-2 Production Check; Ranging/Radiometric   May 07
    Inclusion Decision)

    Red-2 (Submission to Secretariat’s Office)                          Sep 07

    XML Schema Update (Red-2 Compliance)                                Oct 07

    Prototype Interoperations (Red-1 Compliant)                         Apr – Sep 07

               Overall SMWG Status with respect to status of

Service Management         1st Priority           With exception of
Recommendation                                    ranging/radiometric
                                                  management appears
                                                  Red-2 will be produced by
                                                  Sept 07
W3C XmlSchema              2nd Priority           OK; Schema updates to
                                                  be sequenced after Red-2

At least two               2nd Priority           Prototype activities are
independently developed                           underway/will be resumed
interoperable prototypes                          in near future

Concept Book               3rd Priority           Plan in place for
                                                  production of Green Book
                                                  to support Red-2 review;
                                                  insufficient resources for
                                                  more advance use case

Shared By: