Dear Tracy / Sam
Following to my last day email , please find in below some comments
about last draft documents LRIT .
If possible for you , please refer it to relevant working group ( or in
plenary) for consideration and inform me about the results
Best regards
Saeid Khorsandi
Senior expert of marine communication
Ports and shipping organization - Iran
GENERAL COMMENTS ( To Mr. SAM RYAN ):
1- In order to do some arrangments between all working groups and
also have a same policy in common points , I suggest all working
group's chairmans have a meeting about the decisions at the end of each
day . For example in last meeting ( third Ad Hoc ) , there was two
different views in IDE-COMM and BILLING COSTING groups concerning the
method of transaction messages as a flag state and necessity for LRIT
info From ships associated with DC go out and back through IDE
2- In the last session ( third meeting ) output document of IDE-COMM
included some important comments which have been written in left side of
each paragraphs or tables , but in last draft document we couldn' t find
any feed back or result of these comments . Please inform all members
about results of discussion in these comments via the reflector.
OTHER COMMENTS
1- According to part 10.3 of performance standards the IDE have
continuous access to DDP . But in the system architecture figure in the
Performance Standards does not have an arrow linking the Data
Distribution Plan to the International LRIT Data Exchange . Also in
figure 2 of draft document for communication, there is a direct link
between DDP and IDE . This matter should be considered in IDE and DDP
working groups.
2- About the access to information as a Port State , as far as you
know a Port State request is always triggered by a Notice of Arrival but
who is responsible for sending the NOA and how? For your information
currently the format of NOA's are different around the world and being
issued by the agent of ships to the destination port which the
contracting government doesn't have any information about the ship
destination.
3- According to performance standards , ships as soon as passing
any country's sea borders ( for example port or coastal state borders)
must automatically be configured according to DDP via their DC .
How DCs are being informed , and find out their ships are passing the
countries geographical Sea borders ? Maybe ship born equipment inform
the DC but in this case the DDP should be installed in the ship's
terminal !!! If DC has discovered a match , in this case ships should be
configured in minimum interval for finding the exact time of border
passing ( and the billing will be raised)
4- In last draft document of international data center :
a. In part 1.2.2.2 term " identification" must be changed to " ship
borne equipment Id." According to table 1 . It should be distinguished
what is this " ship borne equipment Id "?
b. As have been written in this document "IDC operator" means the
individual responsible for the daily operation and maintenance of the
International LRIT Data Centre , but the qualification of this operators
and level of education should be considered by the working group ( IDC
group)
c. In part 1.2.3.2 term " the present Performance standards" must
be changed to " the present technical spec."
d. Part 3.2.1.2 is not needed.
Show replies by date