Minutes FDSN Working group II- Data Centers and Formats

June 13, 2002, 8:00-10:00

 

Present: T. Ahern, H. Bolton, R. Buland, R. Butler, R. Casey, B. Dost, J. Fonseca, Y. Fukao, Z. Gangwei, F. Haslinger, B. Hirshorn, H. Kao, W-T. Liang, J. Lyons, S. Mazza, M. Olivieri, D. Pesaresi, B. Romanowicz, N. Takeuchi,  C. Trabant , S. Tsuboi, J. Saul, B. Weertman 

 

  1. Station naming conventions

 

    1. Proposal ANSS station naming

Two documents were sent to the WG members to be discussed at the meeting

Ray Buland introduced the subject and explained that with the operation of large networks like ANSS the present SEED structure would not be adequate. He proposes to extend the station, network and channel naming. This would require a major restructuring of SEED, since it would affect not only the blockette structure, but also the fixed header section in the data record.

In view of the vast amount of data presently available in SEED it was felt that the first priority should be to see if any foreseen problem could be resolved in the present structure. Although the present structure is not ideal, it appeared that there are at present no issues that cannot be solved. Therefore, it was decided at this stage not to change the structure of SEED.  In terms of future enhancements of SEED the approach of using XML might be more beneficial.

 

    1. Proposal for the use of network code IR

Ray Willeman explains in an email the fact that stations may have a different codes for the FDSN and for the WDC/ISC. He suggests 5 actions to reduce incompatibility between the two systems. Main points are the network code IR assigned by the FDSN and the set-up of a FDSN/IR coordination group. More details can be found in the document. Members of the WG did react in a positive way on the proposal. Action by the FDSN should be the set-up of a coordination group.

 

Both documents are available from the FDSN Web pages (http://www.fdsn.org/FDSNmeetings/WGIIAgenda2002.htm)

 

 

  1. SEED Issues

 

    1. Seiji Tsuboi contributed by email a proposal to extend SEED to XML. The members of the WG were very enthusiastic on this draft proposal and proposed to continue to investigate the possibilities of XML. At the meeting Seiji also distributed a scheme where he showed how the conversion could be done. It was proposed that Rob Casey and Seiji Tsuboi should continue to explore this issue.

 

    1. Doug Neuhauser brought up several issues. These were distributed, but no objections were received. The issues are:

                                                     i.     Blockette 8, add network code---  accepted

                                                       ii.     Byte order for fixed Data Header and blockettes---- accepted

                                                        iii.     Blockette 2000--- already in manual (check)

                                                         iv.     Post archiving timing correction---- bad idea, does not work and will be removed

                                                       v.     Use of blockette 1000 info in SEED volumes--- wording changed in last version of the manual

                                                         vi.     Fundamental definition of SEED DDL concerning byte order

1.    DDL assumes big-endian

2.    Doug will be asked to provide a proposal for the proper wording in the SEED manual

 

  1. Real time data exchange
    1. No time was left to discuss this point, but see Other Matters
  2. Development of NetDC/AutoDRM
  3. Development of Wilber
  4. Other matters

 

Winfried Hanka sent around a memo expressing his concern on the issue of the lack of visibility of the station operators in times of easy access to large volumes of high quality (real-time) data. Authors of papers refer to the IRIS-DMC even when data from non-IRIS networks are used, in one case GE NRT data are listed under an IRIS-GSN heading. The most dangerous part is if parametric data, analyzed by national/regional centers and sent to e.g. the NEIC, ends up not being used in the bulletins, but instead shows the readings from the real-time data picked by the NEIC itself. This may be harmful for funding the national/regional centers.

 

The WG members recognized the importance of this issue, but did not see any solution at the short term. Suggestions were:

1.    To put acknowledgements on the FDSN Web pages

2.    Make rdseed refer to the origin of the data (list network codes)

 

The question remains: how do stations/networks want to get their credits. Ask for proposals.

 

In general it was proposed to make the FDSN Web page more dynamic. Make reports and/or discussion papers directly accessible from the Web pages.