September 2006 - Ccglrit-gcclrit - National Capital Freenet

FW: Documents from Paris meeting of LRIT Ad Hoc Engineering Group

by RyanS＠DFO-MPO.GC.CA

Dear Colleagues, Many thanks to all of you who participated at last week's extremely productive meeting of the LRIT Ad Hoc Engineering Group at IALA/AISM headquarters in Saint Germain en Laye. Attached pleased find the following documents emanating from that meeting. 1) LRIT International Data Centre (IDC) - Working Group 1 (OPI Bill Cairns) 2) LRIT International Data Exchange (IDE) - Working Group 2 (OPI Neil Trainor) 3) LRIT Communications Protocol (CP) - Working Group 3 (OPI Craig Hayley) As agreed to at the meeting, comments on these documents are requested by close of business this Friday, September 15. Revised drafts reflecting those comments will be circulated for your final review on or around September 25. For those who were at last week's meeting, please note that the attached documents are identical to those provided to you at the close of the meeting. Still to come (target is tomorrow) are: - Revised drafts of the two documents related to the other two deliverables: 1) The test specification; and 2) Guidance on the data distribution plan; and - The Meeting Report. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact me. Regards, Sam. Sam Ryan A/Director Service Delivery - Directeur int. Prestation des services Canadian Coast Guard - Garde côtière canadienne 613 998-1505 | facsimile / télécopieur 613 998-9258 ryans(a)dfo-mpo.gc.ca Fisheries and Oceans Canada | 200 Kent St., 7S036 Pêches et Océans Canada | 200, rue Kent, 7S036 Ottawa, ON, K1A 0E6 Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada

17 years, 7 months

2
1
0 / 0

LRIT messaging segments

by o i

Hi, I have finished my immediate thoughts for the LRIT messaging segments to contain all components of the system. Regards, Osama El-Fiky AAST&MT _________________________________________________________________ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.com/

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [Ccglrit-gcclrit] LRIT docs

by Cairns, William

Colleagues, Attached please find the WG1 effort on IDC which is hereby forwarded to the Chairman and Editor for final submission to MSC. Thanks for all your efforts. Best regards, Bill Cairns, FRIN Principal Engineer Long Range Identification & Tracking Commandant (G-PWN-3) USCG Electronics Navigation Division William.R.Cairns(a)uscg.mil V: 202-372-1557 F: 202-372-1930 ________________________________ From: PeverettT(a)DFO-MPO.GC.CA [mailto:PeverettT@DFO-MPO.GC.CA] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:56 AM To: neil.trainor(a)amsa.gov.au; Cairns, William Subject: LRIT docs Gentlemen, Could you please send me the latest versions of your documents by COB today, and I can start editing. I have already received Craig's document, so he wins the golden lollipop. Any subsequent changes that you make to your respective documents should be forwarded to me for inclusion in the master. I will consult with you on any changes I propose to make that are not strictly editorial in nature. Once I've finished, I'll send each of you your document for final review (likely Monday). The intent is then to send it to everyone on the reflector one final time prior to the editorial meeting. regards Tracy Bill - Hope this e-mail reaches you, as I suspect you're probably in line getting front row seats to the premiere of "The Guardian". I understand Ashton Kutcher plays you in the movie, which I hope will assist in raising the profile of SAR in the post-9/11 US Coast Guard (although from the trailer I think you should be worried). ________________________________ From: Trainor, Neil [mailto:neil.trainor@amsa.gov.au] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 1:36 AM To: BertorelliJ(a)DFO-MPO.GC.CA; HayleyCR(a)DFO-MPO.GC.CA; PeverettT(a)DFO-MPO.GC.CA Subject: RE: LRIT Status Meeting Thanks John I've been on the move so unfortunately mised you email yesterday. Trust all went well. I'm available all of next week if you plan a follow-up meeting. With regards to billing - I don't really see this as being in the TOR for this group and will only dominate discussion if allowed. Perhaps, the issue can be raised in the final report as it is the big question at the end of the day. Regards Neil -----Original Message----- From: BertorelliJ(a)DFO-MPO.GC.CA [mailto:BertorelliJ@DFO-MPO.GC.CA] Sent: Thursday, 10 August 2006 4:23 AM To: Trainor, Neil; HayleyCR(a)DFO-MPO.GC.CA; PeverettT(a)DFO-MPO.GC.CA Subject: LRIT Status Meeting Unfortunately, we didn't talk last week but we will start this week. Neil, we will call you tomorrow night, 7:00 am your time if that is acceptable? Suggested points of discussion: 1. Standards - Points of Contact? 2. General Status; and, 3. Template. Cheers John Bertorelli PS. Tracey, Craig, I guess our communication times will be 6:30 pm for Craig and 5:00 pm Tracey and John. ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this communication is prohibited. If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by telephone on +61 2 62795000 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. **********************************************************************

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

Proposed items for the LRIT Tests

by Olaf.Jansen＠dnv.com

Hi, I have been quite busy the last few weeks after the LRIT meeting in Paris, as I am sure is the case for all you, - and the 15th is now long passed. I have written down my immediate thoughts for the LRIT tests including some issues related to the Request for Proposal. I may have missed some items and some items may already be included, but I hope the group handling the testing can use some of it. Regards, Olaf Jansen DNV

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [Ccglrit-gcclrit] email list Reflector

by BertorelliJ＠DFO-MPO.GC.CA

Sir, your e-mail address was already added to the list. Could you please let me know if you received and e-mail yesterday afternoon for the reflector? Best Regards, John Bertorelli -----Original Message----- From: ccglrit-gcclrit-bounces(a)lists.ncf.ca [mailto:ccglrit-gcclrit-bounces@lists.ncf.ca] On Behalf Of o i Sent: September 21, 2006 7:16 AM To: ccglrit-gcclrit(a)lists.ncf.ca Subject: [Ccglrit-gcclrit] email list Reflector Pls add my name to the email Reflector list my email is oib12(a)hotmail.com thanks _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ccglrit-gcclrit mailing list Ccglrit-gcclrit(a)lists.ncf.ca http://lists.ncf.ca/mailman/listinfo/ccglrit-gcclrit

17 years, 7 months

2
1
0 / 0

email list Reflector

by o i

Pls add my name to the email Reflector list my email is oib12(a)hotmail.com thanks _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

Updates to LRIT communications document (working group 3)

by HayleyCR＠DFO-MPO.GC.CA

Dear Colleagues, Attached is the latest LRIT communications document. Changes since our Paris meeting are high lighted in red. Some additional information pertaining to the operation of port state, flag state and coastal state will likely have to be added to the document. The notes at the end of the document will be removed and additional words will likely be added. If you have any questions than please let me know. Regards, Craig Hayley Electronics System Engineer Canadian Coast Guard PH: 709-772-7740 <<WG 3 LRIT Communications AdHoc sept20.doc>>

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

Updated WG1 Doc

by Cairns, William

Colleagues, I have made some minor edits in track changes to the IDC document (note change in file name) attached for your consideration. Recall that edits are due by COB today. Best regards, Bill Cairns, FRIN Principal Engineer Long Range Identification & Tracking Commandant (G-PWN-3) USCG Electronics Navigation Division William.R.Cairns(a)uscg.mil V: 202-372-1557 F: 202-372-1930

17 years, 7 months

2
1
0 / 0

Comments on LRIT documents

by HayleyCR＠DFO-MPO.GC.CA

Dear Colleagues, Provided below are some comments with respect to the documents that we worked on in Paris. LRIT communications document (working group 3) *************************************** * The Ship Name parameter in table 4 has been put back in the document and left as an optional parameter. Section 16.1.3 of Resolution MSC.210(81) states that contracting governments may pass along ship name in order to obtain LRIT information. 1 The message ID parameter outlined in the various message tables is intended to provide a unique number that will differentiate the various messages in the LRIT system. It fails to accomplish this objective since the combination of DC id and time stamp will not produce a unique number. Creation of message ID has changed to the following (message type parameter added since message IDs will be different sizes): * Request based messages: Message type, IMO#, contracting government ID, time stamp. 1 Positional data report: Message type, IMO#, DC ID, time stamp 2. 2 SAR Surpic: Message Type, contracting government ID, time stamp. 3 Error messages: Message type, node ID, time stamp. 4 DDP update: Message Type, time stamp. * Time stamp parameter should be added to table 4 (ship position request), table 5, table 6 and table 7. International Data Exchange Document (working group 2) ******************************************** * Message ID and message type terminology used in the document is also used in the communications document. It may be beneficial to standardize on this type of terminology since the terms are used differently in each document. * The document states (page 3, 2.1.1.1) that requesting data centers will include LRIT data center ID information in the requesting message header. The data exchange would use this information in routing of the request message. Currently, a slightly different methodology is outlined in the communications specification. The ship's flag state information is included in the requesting message as opposed to a data center ID parameter. The data exchange would view the flag state parameter and route to the appropriate data center. I believe both methods are acceptable and we simply need to choose one method. However, all contracting governments will have to know the data center that a given flag is assigned to if the method described in the data exchange is chosen (example: Canada, as a port state, has just received an NOA from a USA ship. Canada must check a list to determine which data center, the USA ship is reporting to. This is an extra step on the contracting government's part). * Receipt messages are not covered in communications document. * Response messages, other messages and SAR messages are described in the communications document. I propose that they are described in only one document in order to avoid confusion. * I would expect to see a block diagram similar in concept to the one outlined in the data center document. Each block would than be described in the document. Regards, Craig Hayley Electronics System Engineer Canadian Coast Guard PH: 709-772-7740

17 years, 7 months

2
1
0 / 0

Comments on WG3 Paper

by Christopher Snowdon

Colleagues I'm sorry for the lateness of the hour, but I have two comments on the paper discussing the communications specification (output paper 3). Firstly, the paper makes a couple of references to satellite communciation equipment. The papers produced by IMO so far have been technologically-neutral, so I suggest that we simply refer to "the ship-borne equipment". This is more consistent. Secondly, the paper suggests that the extra reporting period should be limited to 15 mins, 30 mins, 1 hour etc. and that additional users should be accommodated within this structure. As the document stands at present, this looks arbitrary and I suggest that we add extra text to explain that this is to reduce the complexity of the ship-borne equipment whilst allowing the data centres to cater fror a greater number of users, or something similar. Congratulations to all for the work done so far. regards (for Iridium) Christopher Snowdon ================================ Access Partnership Grayton House 498 Fulham Road London SW6 5NH United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 7835 5910 Fax: +44 (0)20 7610 3934 www.accesspartnership.com ================================

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

Ccglrit-gcclrit September 2006