Withdrawal of X3.268-1997
Gene_Milligan at notes.seagate.com
Mon Feb 24 16:32:18 PST 1997
* From the SCSI Reflector (scsi at symbios.com), posted by:
* Gene Milligan <Gene_Milligan at notes.seagate.com>
> Early adopters already have SBP-2 implementations underway;
My recollection is that the same claims were made about SBP. Will it have a
longer half life? Has the SBP-2 project proposal been reviewed as to its stated
impact on SBP? X3T10 should consider publishing trial balloons rather than
> to comply with the T10 "two week" rule for new business.
>This will require a roll-call vote at the plenary.
There is no two week rule concerning motions which have no substantive
documents. In view of the uncertainty of the situation I think a letter ballot
crafted to require a No vote to pass would be more appropriate. But procedures
are not the issue credibility is the issue.
Assuming there is a confusion factor (perhaps by finding that some are trying
to implement SBP when others are implementing SBP-2) another alternative would
be better. Withdrawing a standard does not cause distributed copies to be
returned. I assume from the discussion that if implemented, SBP and SBP-2 are
incompatible. Another alternative which would not require OMC, NCITS, and ANSI
action would be to rename SBP-2 (e.g. High Performance Serial Bus Protocol
Thank you Peter for the heads up.
* For SCSI Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info scsi' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at symbios.com
More information about the T10