Requirement: Fix byte order of binary portions of header; define byte order of payload via encoding values

[krischer]

Simplification of MiniSEED2: Fix byte order (e.g. little endian) of binary portions of header; define byte order of payload via encoding values.

[chad-earthscope]

In the July 2017 discussion on this topic support for a fixed by order was unanimous among those involved. It was not decided which byte order should be chosen.

I have a slight preference for little-endian as that is the native order for most of the hardware that will be reading this data for the foreseeable future. One wrinkle is that the Steim encodings are only allowed to be big-endian.

[krischer]

👍 for little endian.

[krischer]

Summary

(Please let me know if I missed a point or misunderstood something)

Please vote on:

1. Should the byte-order of the header be fixed? (Yes/No)
2. Assuming yes on (1): What should it be? (Little endian / Big endian)
3. Should the byte order of the data be defined by the encoding? Already implicit for some in miniSEED 2.x; others require some additional specification. (Yes/No)

[crotwell]

1 yes
2 little
3 yes - by this you mean the 2 might be "big endian 32 bit ints" and 47 might be "little endian 32 bit ints" (I am making up numbers of course) and there would be no number for "little endian steim1" as that doesn't exist.

[ketchum-usgs]

1. Yes
2. No strong opinion - network byte ordering (big endian) is always nice.
3. yes

[chad-earthscope]

1. Yes
2. Little
3. Yes.

[kaestli]

1 yes
2 little
3 yes

[ozym]

1. Yes
2. Little
3. Yes

[claudiodsf]

1. Should the byte-order of the header be fixed? (Yes/No)

Yes

2. Assuming yes on (1): What should it be? (Little endian / Big endian)

No strong opinion

3. Should the byte order of the data be defined by the encoding? Already implicit for some in miniSEED 2.x; others require some additional specification. (Yes/No)

Yes

[ihenson-bsl]

1. Yes
2. Little endian
3. Yes

[ValleeMartin]

1. Yes
2. No opinion
3. Yes

[JoseAntonioJara]

1. Yes
2. No strong opinion
3. Yes