Skip to content

plan(DD-009): file relay reuse asks (relay#176 relay-sec E2E, relay#177 SB transport) #41

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
avrabe merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2026
Merged

plan(DD-009): file relay reuse asks (relay#176 relay-sec E2E, relay#177 SB transport) #41

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion artifacts/design-decisions.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ artifacts:
CCSDS codec + cFS app services + stream model but has NO relay-sec dep,
despite relay-sec's description claiming 'shared by falcon and wohl'
(relay#175). So jess would be the FIRST to wire relay-sec as
inter-component E2E - reusable code, but new integration ground. CORRECTION to an earlier claim: relay's MAVLink (X.25
inter-component E2E - reusable code, but new integration ground. Reuse asks filed on relay: relay#176 (expose relay-sec as a transport-agnostic E2E channel, decoupled from CCSDS) and relay#177 (a no_std shared-memory/ipc_service Software Bus transport backend behind the stream<T> seam) - supervising. CORRECTION to an earlier claim: relay's MAVLink (X.25
CRC only, seq is a passthrough - detection-only) and the Software Bus
(no integrity) do NOT carry safety E2E; relay-sec does, and it is the C2
link layer NOT wired to the bus. So the grounded plan: REUSE relay-sec
Expand Down
Loading