09-169r0 Response to 08-289r1 (Proposal to Revoke TrustedFlash Protocol ID)

jgeldman at lexar.com jgeldman at lexar.com
Fri May 1 11:14:51 PDT 2009


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* <jgeldman at lexar.com>
*
It looks like Dave & I will wake people up in CAP.
A line Dave left out from the quoted SD document (numbers removed):
"Security system (xyz) is allocated for the external (third party owned)
security system - TrustedFlash." 
T10, is an INCITs standards committee, authorized by ANSI.  USB, SD, CF,
SATA, etc. are industry consortiums that produce specifications. The
mores are different. 
In the initial approval of the Trusted Flash ID assignment, the initial
request was for a SanDisk reference. That didn't fly with the committee
as we didn't want to "standardize" a vendor proprietary protocol. What
we voted in was conditional on the promise that the technology would be
turned over to an industry consortium. This hasn't occurred since this
all started in 2007.
In the editing process, the protocol reference has turned into a
once-removed vendor proprietary protocol. But it still is vendor
proprietary. This assignment change did not occur in a voted proposal.
This change deserves transparency. This is the issue: Is the lid off for
any proprietary protocol assignment request, or do we keep to the
initial (verbal) guidelines. 
Dave, by the way, thanks for providing examples on the usage of Trusted
Flash. There have been private discussions about taking this into
consideration also.
See you in Seattle,
John Geldman
Director of Industry Standards
Lexar Media
47300 Bayside Parkway
Fremont, CA 94538
P: 510 580-8715
C: 510 449-3597
** Micron/Lexar Confidential **
*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org



More information about the T10 mailing list