Withdrawal of X3.268-1997

Gene Milligan 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 mailing list