ISO 20104:2015

Space data and information transfer systems — Producer-Archive Interface Specification (PAIS)

ISO 20104:2015 is to provide a standard method for formally defining the digital information objects to be transferred by an information Producer to an Archive and for effectively packaging these objects in the form of Submission Information Packages (SIPs). This supports effective transfer and validation of SIP data. ISO 20104:2015 fits into the context defined by: ? The Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) Recommended Standard (see reference [3]). ? The Producer-Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard (PAIMAS) Recommended Standard (see reference [2]). ? The XML Formatted Data Unit (XFDU) Structure and Construction Rules Recommended Standard (see reference [1]). The PAIMAS Recommended Standard (see reference [2]) defines a methodology based on the four following phases: Preliminary, Formal Definition, Transfer, Validation. ISO 20104:2015 applies specifically to the implementation of the main part of the Formal Definition Phase and the Transfer Phase, taking into account part of the Validation Phase. The proposed implementation should help in the automation and management of the Transfer and Validation Phases. The proposed implementation may also be used, to some extent, for the Preliminary Phase. ISO 20104:2015 does not exclude other PAIMAS implementation Recommended Standards.

Systèmes de transfert des informations et données spatiales — Spécification de l'interface entre producteur et archives (PAIS)

General Information

• Status: Published
• Publication Date: 10-Aug-2015
• ICS: 49.140 - Space systems and operations
• Technical Committee: ISO/TC 20/SC 13 - Space data and information transfer systems
• Drafting Committee: ISO/TC 20/SC 13 - Space data and information transfer systems
• Current Stage: 9093 - International Standard confirmed
• Start Date: 14-Nov-2023
• Completion Date: 13-Dec-2025

Relations

• Consolidated By: ISO 17640:2018 - Non-destructive testing of welds — Ultrasonic testing — Techniques, testing levels, and assessment
• Effective Date: 06-Jun-2022

Standards Content (Sample)

INTERNATIONAL ISO
STANDARD 20104
First edition
2015-08-15
Space data and information transfer
systems — Producer-Archive Interface
Specification (PAIS)
Systèmes de transfert des informations et données spatiales —
Spécification de l’interface entre producteur et archives (PAIS)
Reference number
©
ISO 2015
© ISO 2015, Published in Switzerland
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on the internet or an intranet, without prior
written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below or ISO’s member body in the country of
the requester.
ISO copyright office
Ch. de Blandonnet 8 • CP 401
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]
www.iso.org
ii © ISO 2015 – All rights reserved

Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies
(ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through ISO
technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been
established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and
non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
International Standards are drafted in accordance with the rules given in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.
The main task of technical committees is to prepare International Standards. Draft International Standards
adopted by the technical committees are circulated to the member bodies for voting. Publication as an
International Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the member bodies casting a vote.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
ISO 20104 was prepared by the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) (as
CCSDS 651.1-B-1, February 2014) and was adopted (without modifications except those stated in clause 2 of
this International Standard) by Technical Committee ISO/TC 20, Aircraft and space vehicles, Subcommittee
SC 13, Space data and information transfer systems.

Recommendation for Space Data System Standards
PRODUCER-ARCHIVE
INTERFACE
SPECIFICATION (PAIS)
RECOMMENDED STANDARD
CCSDS 651.1-B-1
BLUE BOOK
February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
AUTHORITY
Issue: Recommended Standard, Issue 1
Date: February 2014
Location: Washington, DC, USA
This document has been approved for publication by the Management Council of the
Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) and represents the consensus
technical agreement of the participating CCSDS Member Agencies. The procedure for
review and authorization of CCSDS documents is detailed in Organization and Processes for
the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS A02.1-Y-3), and the record of
Agency participation in the authorization of this document can be obtained from the CCSDS
Secretariat at the address below.

This document is published and maintained by:

CCSDS Secretariat
Space Communications and Navigation Office, 7L70
Space Operations Mission Directorate
NASA Headquarters
Washington, DC 20546-0001, USA
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page i February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
STATEMENT OF INTENT
The Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) is an organization officially
established by the management of its members. The Committee meets periodically to address
data systems problems that are common to all participants, and to formulate sound technical
solutions to these problems. Inasmuch as participation in the CCSDS is completely
voluntary, the results of Committee actions are termed Recommended Standards and are
not considered binding on any Agency.
This Recommended Standard is issued by, and represents the consensus of, the CCSDS
members. Endorsement of this Recommendation is entirely voluntary. Endorsement,
however, indicates the following understandings:
o Whenever a member establishes a CCSDS-related standard, this standard will be in
accord with the relevant Recommended Standard. Establishing such a standard
does not preclude other provisions which a member may develop.
o Whenever a member establishes a CCSDS-related standard, that member will
provide other CCSDS members with the following information:
-- The standard itself.
-- The anticipated date of initial operational capability.
-- The anticipated duration of operational service.
o Specific service arrangements shall be made via memoranda of agreement. Neither
this Recommended Standard nor any ensuing standard is a substitute for a
memorandum of agreement.
No later than three years from its date of issuance, this Recommended Standard will be
reviewed by the CCSDS to determine whether it should: (1) remain in effect without change;
(2) be changed to reflect the impact of new technologies, new requirements, or new
directions; or (3) be retired or canceled.
In those instances when a new version of a Recommended Standard is issued, existing
CCSDS-related member standards and implementations are not negated or deemed to be
non-CCSDS compatible. It is the responsibility of each member to determine when such
standards or implementations are to be modified. Each member is, however, strongly
encouraged to direct planning for its new standards and implementations towards the later
version of the Recommended Standard.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page ii February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
FOREWORD
This Recommended Standard is a technical Recommendation providing the abstract syntax
and an XML implementation of descriptions of data to be sent to an archive. These
descriptions are negotiated agreements between the data Producer and the Archive that
facilitate production of agreed data by the Producer and validation of received data by the
Archive. This Recommended Standard includes an abstract syntax for describing how these
data will be aggregated into packages for transmission and one concrete implementation for
the packages based on the XML Formatted Data Unit (XFDU) standard (see reference [1]).
This will fulfill parts of the process defined in the Producer Archive Ingest Methodology
Abstract Standard (PAIMAS) (see reference [2]).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the
subject of patent rights. CCSDS shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such
patent rights.
Through the process of normal evolution, it is expected that expansion, deletion, or
modification of this document may occur. This Recommended Standard is therefore subject
to CCSDS document management and change control procedures, which are defined in
Organization and Processes for the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems
(CCSDS A02.1-Y-3). Current versions of CCSDS documents are maintained at the CCSDS
Web site:
http://www.ccsds.org/
Questions relating to the contents or status of this document should be addressed to the
CCSDS Secretariat at the address indicated on page i.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page iii February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
At time of publication, the active Member and Observer Agencies of the CCSDS were:
Member Agencies
– Agenzia Spaziale Italiana (ASI)/Italy.
– Canadian Space Agency (CSA)/Canada.
– Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES)/France.
– China National Space Administration (CNSA)/People’s Republic of China.
– Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR)/Germany.
– European Space Agency (ESA)/Europe.
– Federal Space Agency (FSA)/Russian Federation.
– Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE)/Brazil.
– Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)/Japan.
– National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)/USA.
– UK Space Agency/United Kingdom.
Observer Agencies
– Austrian Space Agency (ASA)/Austria.
– Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (BFSPO)/Belgium.
– Central Research Institute of Machine Building (TsNIIMash)/Russian Federation.
– China Satellite Launch and Tracking Control General, Beijing Institute of Tracking
and Telecommunications Technology (CLTC/BITTT)/China.
– Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)/China.
– Chinese Academy of Space Technology (CAST)/China.
– Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO)/Australia.
– Danish National Space Center (DNSC)/Denmark.
– Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia Aeroespacial (DCTA)/Brazil.
– European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites
(EUMETSAT)/Europe.
– European Telecommunications Satellite Organization (EUTELSAT)/Europe.
– Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA)/Thailand.
– Hellenic National Space Committee (HNSC)/Greece.
– Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO)/India.
– Institute of Space Research (IKI)/Russian Federation.
– KFKI Research Institute for Particle & Nuclear Physics (KFKI)/Hungary.
– Korea Aerospace Research Institute (KARI)/Korea.
– Ministry of Communications (MOC)/Israel.
– National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT)/Japan.
– National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/USA.
– National Space Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan (NSARK)/Kazakhstan.
– National Space Organization (NSPO)/Chinese Taipei.
– Naval Center for Space Technology (NCST)/USA.
– Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK)/Turkey.
– South African National Space Agency (SANSA)/Republic of South Africa.
– Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO)/Pakistan.
– Swedish Space Corporation (SSC)/Sweden.
– Swiss Space Office (SSO)/Switzerland.
– United States Geological Survey (USGS)/USA.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page iv February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Document Title Date Status
CCSDS Producer-Archive Interface February Original issue
651.1-B-1 Specification (PAIS), Recommended 2014
Standard, Issue 1
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page v February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
CONTENTS
Section Page
1 INTRODUCTION . 1-1

1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE . 1-1
1.2 APPLICABILITY . 1-1
1.3 RATIONALE . 1-2
1.4 CONFORMANCE . 1-2
1.5 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE . 1-2
1.6 DEFINITIONS . 1-4
1.7 NOMENCLATURE . 1-7
1.8 REFERENCES . 1-8

2 OVERVIEW . 2-1

2.1 GENERAL FRAMEWORK . 2-1
2.2 FORMALLY DESCRIBING DATA OBJECTS FOR TRANSFER . 2-2
2.3 SIP CREATION AND VALIDATION . 2-4

3 DESCRIPTIONS OF PRODUCER DATA . 3-1

3.1 GENERAL . 3-1
3.2 TRANSFER OBJECT TYPE DESCRIPTOR SPECIFICATION (CCSD0014) . 3-1
3.3 COLLECTION DESCRIPTOR SPECIFICATION (CCSD0015) . 3-16
3.4 SPECIALIZATION OF THE DESCRIPTOR MODELS . 3-23

4 DEFINITION OF CONSTRAINTS ON TYPES OF SIPS (CCSD0016). 4-1

4.1 OVERVIEW . 4-1
4.2 ABSTRACT SIP CONSTRAINTS . 4-1
4.3 SIP SEQUENCING CONSTRAINTS IMPLEMENTATION . 4-3

5 ABSTRACT SIP SPECIFICATION (CCSD0017 ) . 5-1

5.1 OVERVIEW . 5-1
5.2 SIP MODEL SPECIFICATION . 5-1
5.3 DISCUSSION . 5-8
5.4 SIP MODEL SPECIALIZATION . 5-10

6 SIP IMPLEMENTATION . 6-1

6.1 OVERVIEW . 6-1
6.2 SIP IMPLEMENTATION USING XFDU . 6-1
6.3 SPECIALIZATION OF THE SIP IMPLEMENTATION IN AN XFDU . 6-8
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page vi February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
CONTENTS (continued)
Section Page
ANNEX A PAIS XML SCHEMAS (NORMATIVE) . A-1
ANNEX B LEGEND FOR XML FIGURES (INFORMATIVE) .B-1
ANNEX C INFORMATIVE REFERENCES (INFORMATIVE) . C-1
ANNEX D MANAGEMENT OF IDS (INFORMATIVE) . D-1
ANNEX E SECURITY, SANA, AND PATENT CONSIDERATIONS
(INFORMATIVE) .E-1
ANNEX F SIP TO XFDU MAPPING EXAMPLE (INFORMATIVE) . F-1
Figure
2-1 PAIS General Process . 2-2
2-2 An Example of the Entities and Their Relationships Involved in
Creating the Formal Specifications . 2-4
2-3 SIP Process . 2-6
3-1 First Decomposition Level of ‘transferObjectTypeDescriptor’ . 3-3
3-2 Complete Decomposition of the ‘transferObjectTypeDescriptor’ . 3-4
3-3 Transfer Object Type Descriptor ‘identification’ . 3-6
3-4 Transfer Object Type Descriptor ‘description’. 3-8
3-5 Transfer Object Type Descriptor ‘relation’ . 3-9
3-6 Transfer Object Type Descriptor ‘groupType’ . 3-15
3-7 Transfer Object Type Descriptor ‘any’ . 3-16
3-8 First Decomposition Level of ‘collectionDescriptor’ . 3-18
3-9 Complete Decomposition of a ‘collectionDescriptor’ . 3-18
3-10 Collection Descriptor ‘identification’ . 3-20
3-11 Collection Descriptor ‘description’ . 3-21
3-12 Collection Descriptor ‘relation’ . 3-22
3-13 Collection Descriptor ‘any’ . 3-22
3-14 Specialization of the Descriptor Models. 3-23
4-1 Decomposition of ‘sipConstraints’ . 4-3
5-1 Abstract View of the SIP Container . 5-2
5-2 Abstract View of the Transfer Object Container . 5-4
5-3 Abstract View of the Transfer Object Group Container . 5-5
5-4 Abstract View of the Data Object Container . 5-7
5-5 Abstract View of SIP, Transfer Object, Transfer Object Group, and Data Object . 5-9
5-6 Specialization of the SIP Model . 5-10
6-1 SIP and XFDU Schemas Constrain the XFDU XML Manifest to
Implement the SIP as an XFDU . 6-2
6-2 SIP Global Information . 6-3
6-3 SIP Transfer Object Identification and Status . 6-4
6-4 SIP Transfer Object Group Identification . 6-4
6-5 SIP Data Object Identification . 6-5
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page vii February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
CONTENTS (continued)
Figure Page
6-6 SIP Transfer Object To Delete . 6-5
6-7 Any Extension Type . 6-5
6-8 sipGlobalInformation Mapped to XFDU . 6-6
6-9 sipTransferObject Mapped to XFDU . 6-7
6-10 Byte Stream Mapped to XFDU byteStream Element . 6-8
B-1 Legend for XML Figures .B-2

CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page viii February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this Recommended Standard is to provide a standard method for formally
defining the digital information objects to be transferred by an information Producer to an
Archive and for effectively packaging these objects in the form of Submission Information
Packages (SIPs). This supports effective transfer and validation of SIP data.
This Recommended Standard fits into the context defined by:
– The Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS)
Recommended Standard (see reference [3]).
– The Producer-Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard (PAIMAS)
Recommended Standard (see reference [2]).
– The XML Formatted Data Unit (XFDU) Structure and Construction Rules
Recommended Standard (see reference [1]).
The PAIMAS Recommended Standard (see reference [2]) defines a methodology based on
the four following phases: Preliminary, Formal Definition, Transfer, Validation.
This Recommended Standard applies specifically to the implementation of the main part of
the Formal Definition Phase and the Transfer Phase, taking into account part of the
Validation Phase.
The proposed implementation should help in the automation and management of the Transfer
and Validation Phases.
The proposed implementation may also be used, to some extent, for the Preliminary Phase.
This Recommended Standard does not exclude other PAIMAS implementation
Recommended Standards.
1.2 APPLICABILITY
The implementation defined in this document applies to any Producer-Archive Project. It is
specifically applicable to those organizations and individuals who create information that
may need Long-Term Preservation and to organizations making information available for the
Long Term.
This application is relevant only if both partners in the Producer-Archive Project agree with a
shared implementation as defined in this document.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-1 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
1.3 RATIONALE
This Recommended Standard aims at overcoming significant difficulties encountered during
transactions between information Producers and the Archives.
Regarding the Formal Definition Phase, this Recommended Standard should enable:
– the Producer to share with the Archive a sufficiently precise, unambiguous definition
of the different Digital Objects to be produced and transferred, including possibly the
order in which they should be transferred;
– the Archive to ensure there is sufficient information to process the Digital Objects
which will be received.
Regarding the Transfer Phase, this Recommended Standard should enable a precise
definition of the SIPs to be exchanged.
Regarding the Validation Phase, this Recommended Standard should enable the use of tools
for systematically validating that the Digital Objects received are those expected, and that
they conform to the level of detail previously agreed.
1.4 CONFORMANCE
An xml implementation is considered ‘Description Conformant’ if it conforms to the
corresponding semantics and implementation specifications defined in sections 3 and 4.
A concrete SIP implementation is considered ‘Abstract SIP Conformant’ if it conforms to the
semantic specification of section 5.
A concrete SIP implementation is considered ‘XFDU PAIS SIP Conformant’ if it conforms
to the semantic specification of section 5 and the implementation specification of section 6.
Concrete SIP implementations in formats other than XFDU are allowed. They will not be
considered ‘XFDU PAIS SIP Conformant’, but they could be ‘Abstract SIP Conformant’. It
is possible that additional concrete PAIS SIP implementations may be standardized in the
future.
1.5 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE
1.5.1 HOW TO READ THIS DOCUMENT
All readers should study subsections 1.1 (Purpose and Scope), 1.2 (Applicability), and 1.4
(Conformance) in order to understand the objectives and applicability of this Recommended
Standard.
Readers seeking an overview of the specification should also read section 2 (Overview).
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-2 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
Those who will implement the specification should read the entire document.
NOTE – A working knowledge of the concepts defined in the PAIMAS (reference [2]),
and of the XFDU structure and construction rules (reference [1]) may be helpful
in order to understand this Recommended Standard.
1.5.2 ORGANIZATION BY SECTION
Section 0 defines the purpose, scope, applicability, rationale and definitions for terminology
used in this Recommended Standard. It also specifies what is required for conformance to
this standard.
Section 2 contains a general overview of the specification. This overview describes the
general framework of the PAIS using terms and concepts from reference [2]. It addresses a
formal description of the Data Objects for transfer and the creation and validation of the SIPs
containing those Data Objects.
Section 3 analyzes in detail the model of the Data Objects to be transferred by the Producer
to the Archive. These Data Objects are organized into collections and Transfer Objects that
are described in detail. Each description is divided into an abstract view, followed by the
implementation view (partial schemas).
Section 4 describes the two different constraints that apply to the SIPs. The first one specifies
the content authorized for each type of SIP. The second one specifies, if necessary, in which
order the SIPs must be delivered. Each part is divided into an abstract view, followed by the
implementation view (partial schemas).
Section 5 describes in detail the different SIP organizing entities, called containers.
Section 6 specifies a concrete SIP implementation using the XFDU (reference [1], partial
schemas), and explains how it maps to the XFDU XML schema.
The annexes listed here are normative or informative:
– Annex A contains the full XML schemas for this specification and is normative.
XML schema diagrams are presented throughout other sections of the book. If an
XML schema diagram differs from the schema, the schema is considered to be the
ruling entity.
– Annex B is a legend for symbols for the XML Authority Diagrams that appears in
sections 3 to 6 of this document and is informative.
– Annex C contains the informative references.
– Annex D provides a table showing the management of the different identifiers defined
in this document and is informative.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-3 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
– Annex E discusses Security, Space Assigned Numbers Authority (SANA), and Patent
Considerations and is informative.
– Annex F provides an example SIP, with Descriptors, and the mapping of the SIP to
the XFDU, and is informative.
1.6 DEFINITIONS
1.6.1 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
This subsection defines the acronyms and abbreviations which are used throughout this
Recommended Standard:
AIP Archival Information Package
CCSDS Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems
CCSDS CA CCSDS Control Authority
CRC Cyclic Redundancy Check
DED Data Entity Dictionary
DTD Document Type Definition
FTP File Transfer Protocol
Gigabyte
GB
ID Identifier
Internet Engineering Task Force
IETF
ISO International Organization for Standardization
Kilobyte
KB
MB Megabyte
Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions
MIME
MOT Model of Objects for Transfer
OAIS Open Archival Information System
PAIMAS Producer Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard
PAIS Producer-Archive Interface Specification
PB Petabyte
SIP Submission Information Package
TB Terabyte
TOTD Transfer Object Type Descriptor
URL Universal Resource Locator
XFDU XML Formatted Data Unit
XML eXtensible Markup Language
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-4 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
1.6.2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
OAIS terminology as defined in references [2] is used throughout this recommendation.
Following is a short glossary of the OAIS terminology indispensable for this document. The
terminology used is fully defined in references [2], [3], and [C3], except for the definitions
printed in italics which are defined in this document. Only brief definitions are provided
here. This terminology does not seek to replace existing terminology in the various domains
related to archiving. Each domain should be able to apply this methodology while retaining
their specific terminology. When first used in the following sections, the terms defined in the
terminology are shown in bold.
Moreover, it is assumed that it is not necessary for the Producer to know and understand the
information model and the typology of the OAIS information categories in detail, such as
Content Information, Representation Information, Preservation Description Information, etc.
Indeed, it is the Archive’s task to create AIPs from the SIPs transferred and thus to establish
the suitable link between a given object coming from the Producer and any particular
information category in the AIP within which this object will be inserted. To establish a
dialog, the Producer and the Archive must agree on a common terminology and a common
understanding of the associated concepts.
Archive: An organization that intends to preserve information for access and use by a
Designated Community.
Collection Descriptor: A set of attributes that describes a view of a single collection of data
and that identifies the parent collection of which it is a part.
Data Object: Either a Physical Object or a Digital Object.
Data Object Type: A set of characteristics describing a Data Object (such as the size of this
object and the description of its content). Typically there will be multiple Data Objects
conforming to the same Data Object Type.
Descriptor: Either a Collection Descriptor or a Transfer Object Type Descriptor.
Descriptor Model: A model that defines the mandatory and optional attributes needed for a
Collection Descriptor or a Transfer Object Type Descriptor.
Digital Object: An object composed of a set of bit sequences.
Fixity Information: The information which documents the mechanisms that ensure that the
Content Information Object has not been altered in an undocumented manner. An example is
a Cyclical Redundancy Check (CRC) code for a file.
Information: Any type of knowledge that can be exchanged. In an exchange, it is
represented by data. An example is a string of bits (the data) accompanied by a description of
how to interpret a string of bits as numbers representing temperature observations measured
in degrees Celsius (the Representation Information).
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-5 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
Information Package: A conceptual container composed of optional Content Information
and optional associated Preservation Description Information. Associated with this
Information Package is Packaging Information used to delimit and identify the Content
Information and Package Description Information used to facilitate searches for the Content
Information.
Model: A data entity described independently from any instance in a data product, and
corresponding to a re-usable data entity definition, from which other data entities may inherit
the attributes and apply some specialization rules (see reference [C3]).
Model of Objects for Transfer (MOT): The set of all Descriptors for a given Producer-Archive
Project. It is used jointly by the Producer and the Archive to provide a common and
understandable hierarchical view of the Producer’s Data Objects to be transferred and their
organization into collections, and it supports possible additional relationships among them.
The hierarchy may be viewed as a tree having leaf and non-leaf nodes. The Data Objects to be
transferred, organized as ‘Transfer Objects,’ are represented by the leaves of the MOT. Thus
the nodes of the MOT have a different meaning depending on whether they are leaves or not:
– A leaf node corresponds to a single Transfer Object Type and therefore one exists for
each Transfer Object Type Descriptor.
– A non-leaf node corresponds to a collection view of Transfer Object Types, or of a
collection of collections. A non-leaf node exists for each Collection Descriptor.
Producer: The role played by those persons or client systems who provide the information
to be preserved. This can include other OAISes or internal OAIS persons or systems.
Producer-Archive Project: A Producer-Archive Project is a set of activities and the means
used by the information Producer as well as the Archive to ingest a given set of information
into the Archive.
Submission Agreement: The agreement reached between an OAIS and the Producer that
specifies a data model, and any other arrangements needed, for the Data Submission Session.
This data model identifies format/contents and the logical constructs used by the Producer
and how they are represented on each media delivery or in a telecommunication session.
Submission Information Package (SIP): An Information Package that is delivered by the
Producer to the OAIS for use in the construction or update of one or more AIPs and/or the
associated Descriptive Information.
Transfer Object: A set of one or more Transfer Object Groups containing at least one Data
Object that are to be transferred to the Archive.
Transfer Object Group: A set of zero or more Data Objects and zero or more Transfer
Object Groups.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-6 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
Transfer Object Group Type: A set of characteristics describing a Transfer Object Group.
Typically there can be multiple Transfer Object Groups conforming to the same Transfer
Object Group Type.
Transfer Object Type: A set of characteristics describing a Transfer Object (such as the size
of this object, the description of its content, and its makeup in terms of one or more Data
Object Types). Typically there can be multiple Transfer Objects conforming to the same
Transfer Object Type.
Transfer Object Type Descriptor: A set of attributes that describes a Transfer Object Type
and that identifies the parent collection of which it is a part.
1.7 NOMENCLATURE
1.7.1 NORMATIVE TEXT
The following conventions apply for the normative specifications in this Recommended
Standard:
a) the words ‘shall’ and ‘must’ imply a binding and verifiable specification;
b) the word ‘should’ implies an optional, but desirable, specification;
c) the word ‘may’ implies an optional specification;
d) the words ‘is’, ‘are’, and ‘will’ imply statements of fact.
NOTE – These conventions do not imply constraints on diction in text that is clearly
informative in nature.
1.7.2 INFORMATIVE TEXT
In the normative sections of this document (sections 3-6), informative text is set off from the
normative specifications either in notes or under one of the following subsection headings:
– Overview;
– Background;
– Rationale;
– Discussion.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-7 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
1.8 REFERENCES
The following documents contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute
provisions of this Recommended Standard. At the time of publication, the editions indicated
were valid. All documents are subject to revision, and users of this Recommended Standard
are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent editions of the
documents indicated below. The CCSDS Secretariat maintains a register of currently valid
CCSDS Recommended Standards.
[1] XML Formatted Data Unit (XFDU) Structure and Construction Rules. Issue 1.
Recommendation for Space Data System Standards (Blue Book), CCSDS 661.0-B-1.
Washington, D.C.: CCSDS, September 2008. [Equivalent to ISO 13527:2010.]
[2] Producer-Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard. Issue 1. Recommendation
for Space Data System Practices (Magenta Book), CCSDS 651.0-M-1. Washington,
D.C.: CCSDS, May 2004. [Equivalent to ISO 20652:2006.]
[3] Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS). Issue 2.
Recommendation for Space Data System Practices (Magenta Book), CCSDS 650.0-M-
2. Washington, D.C.: CCSDS, June 2012. [Equivalent to ISO 14721:2012.]

CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 1-8 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
2 OVERVIEW
2.1 GENERAL FRAMEWORK
The general context for this Recommended Standard is that of the transfer of Digital Objects
from a data Producer to an Archive. A methodology for specifying, performing, and
validating this transfer is defined in the PAIMAS Recommended Standard (see
reference [2]).
A key objective of the PAIS Recommended Standard is to provide a method to formally
define the Digital Objects, along with their important inter-relationships, that are to be
transferred by a data Producer to an Archive. This is performed during the Formal Definition
Phase as defined in PAIMAS.
Another objective is to support the effective transfer of these objects in the form of
Submission Information Packages (SIPs) as modeled in the OAIS Reference Model (see
reference [3]). If these objectives are met, use of the PAIS Recommended Standard should
facilitate validation by the Archive that all the objects expected have been received and that
they conform to the characteristics expected. This is performed during the Transfer Phase
and the Validation Phase.
A high-level view of the process involving use of this Recommended Standard is given in
figure 2-1. This process shows a breakdown into two phases: Formal Definition and Transfer
with Validation. Data Objects are formally defined using Descriptors, and then constraints
on their transfer in terms of grouping and sequencing are addressed. This is negotiated with
the Producer and results in the Submission Agreement. During the Transfer Phase the Data
Objects are packaged into SIPs with links to their associated Descriptors, thus allowing the
Archive to perform validation on each Data Object.
The PAIS Recommended Standard specifies how to construct Descriptors, how to define
types of SIPs, and how to define any sequencing constraints among types of SIPs. It also
specifies an abstract SIP and how to instantiate this within a standardized data package
known as an XFDU (see reference [1]). It does not address the actual transfer of a SIP nor
how the Archive does validation upon the received SIP. The extent of such validation will
depend, in part, on the details of Descriptor implementations and the level of validation
required by the Producer-Archive Project.
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 2-1 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
Digital objects
*
Create Descriptor Descriptors
Specifications
SIPs
SIPs
Create SIP Content
SIP
Type Specifications
SIP Transfer Reception and
SIP Creation
Validation
by the Archive
Create SIP Sequencing
Constraints Specification
Transfer Phase
Formal Definition Phase
Time
Formal Agreement
Producer and Archive responsibility
Archive responsibility
The process of data creation is not part of the standard. The data
*
could exist at the beginning, or be created during the process.
Producer responsibility
Figure 2-1: PAIS General Process
2.2 FORMALLY DESCRIBING DATA OBJECTS FOR TRANSFER
An example of the process for generating formal specification material is shown in figure 2-2.
One of the objectives of the Formal Definition Phase is to define the Data Objects, where
hereafter a Data Object is understood to be one or more data files, to be transferred as
possibly more complex data structures called Transfer Objects. Each Transfer Object is an
instance of a particular Transfer Object Type. Each Transfer Object Type is described in
detail by a Transfer Object Type Descriptor. A Transfer Object Type Descriptor consists
of a set of mandatory, optional, and possibly user-defined attributes, and is generated for
each type of Transfer Object. A collection of Transfer Object Types, or a collection of other
collections, is described by a Collection Descriptor. It also consists of a set of mandatory,
optional, and possibly user defined attributes. The Transfer Object Type and Collection
Descriptors are expected to be complete enough to provide the information needed for an
adequate description of different types of objects to be transferred to the Archive, and they
are expected to be flexible enough to adapt to the specializations required by each Producer-
Archive Project. One Collection Descriptor will be generated for each collection view. Both
Transfer Object Type Descriptors and Collection Descriptors have attributes giving
relationships among the Data Objects they are describing. The set of Descriptors for a
Producer-Archive Project constitutes a Model called the Model of Objects for Transfer
(MOT) for that project. Each Descriptor has a mandatory relationship-attribute, called
‘parentCollection’, that identifies the Collection Descriptor that provides a collection view of
CCSDS 651.1-B-1 Page 2-2 February 2014
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FOR PRODUCER-ARCHIVE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION
the subject Descriptor’s Data Objects. The resulting hierarchical view of Descriptors and the
data they describe constitute an important aspect of the MOT.
It should be noted that the MOT is not an information organization model within the
Archive. It is simply a way to enable the Producer and Archive to agree on the content of the
information to be transferred. As such the MOT is the basis for negotiating a Submission
Agreement. It should be noted also that each Descriptor has optional and possibly user
defined attributes. This allows an Archive to tailor the two Descriptor Models (Transfer
Object Type and collection) given in this Recommended Standard to meet the needs of
describing the data to be transferred in a given Producer-Archive Project.
In the remainder of this document, the term ‘Descriptor’ is used for a Transfer Object Type
Descriptor or a Collection Descriptor, and the phrase ‘Transfer Object’ is used to refer to an
instance, while ‘Transfer Object Type’ or ‘type of Data Object’ is used to refer to the class of
a Transfer Object or Data Object.
Section 3 contains the requirements from the Producer and the Archive to specify and
implement the MOT during the Formal Definition Phase, described just above.
Another objective of the Formal Definition Phase is the consideration of whether some SIPs
will be allowed to carry only some Transfer Object Types and not others, thereby defining
SIP Content Type constraints, and whether some SIPs will need to be processed by the
Archive before other SIPs, thereby defining SIP sequencing constraints. This is shown
schematically in figure 2-2. This Recommended Standard requires that a Transfer Object,
and therefore also a Data Object, shall not be divided between two or more SIPs. This is to
facilitate management of the Transfer Object exchange.
Section 4 contains th
...