Draft Minutes of SPI-3 Working Group Meeting -- November 3, 1998

Gene_Milligan at notes.seagate.com Gene_Milligan at notes.seagate.com
Thu Nov 12 17:14:17 PST 1998

* From the T10 (formerly SCSI) Reflector (t10 at symbios.com), posted by:
* Gene_Milligan at notes.seagate.com
The minutes failed to capture my request that if a proposal is not provided
that  item 4.3 be removed from the SPI-3 agenda.

<< Louis and Paul agreed to develop a mutually
agreeable I-V curve for presentation at the next SPI-3 working group.>>

     That is interesting. I heard them agree to defer further discussion
until the next meeting. I did not hear them agree to agree.

Regarding 4.8: <<Gene Milligan asked if there is a schedule for the
development of SPI-3.  John
Lohmeyer reported that the project proposal for SPI-3 says that forwarding
NCITS will occur in May, 1999.  Gene suggested that the group consider
a cutoff date for new proposals.>>

     The minutes are correct. But, I would like to point out the following
items from T10's policies and procedures:
     "It is the policy of X3T10 to: focus standards development within the
defined scope of X3T10; control the development schedule to achieve timely
publication; and to provide regular updates of adopted standards which need
enhancements to fuel advancements in the industry.

     The Chair will appoint  a project leader and a project editor for each
new project for which the Chair has authorized a study effort and/or for
which a project has been approved by X3. The project leader may or may not
be the project editor. The project leader shall be responsible for
providing a progress report including schedule adherence, key issues, and
corrective actions at each plenary."

     I request that the officers of T10 resume taking action to enforce
these aspects of the T10 policies and procedures.

Regarding 4.9: <<Gene Milligan noted that timing definitions now include QA
maximum assertion
and release times, but the defined times are not used in the protocol
description. >>

     I did not say "but the defined times are not used in the protocol
description." I said "that as long as there is not a requirement that the
assertion time be as long as to travel down a maximum cable delay to an
expander, through the expander, and down a second maximum cable delay, the
name changes had cleared the issue I had raised."

I think 4.10 should have gone on to say that "there was general agreement
at this session that the setup time should be approximately 10 nanoseconds
longer than the data setup time."

Regarding <<4.14   QAS and Glitch Filters>> the minutes are fairly accurate
except for the opinion that "but found no immediate solutions". Even that
is correct if that means the suggested solutions were not immediately
written down and were only spoken. I think the fact and statement that any
glitch filters can be specified to be of an adequate width to ensure that
the QAS message is seen by all QAS devices was missed by an impression that
I think occurred that devices would be looking for the message in different
data rate modes. There are no message rate modes for the message phase.
Clearly the QAS message needs to be asserted long enough and the ACK/REQ
needs to be long enough and other messages will need to have timing that
does not produce a corner condition of false detection. Rather than making
a rash proposal at the meeting it was more appropriate to consider Bruce's
concern and to double check if the SPI-3 message timing requirements for
QAS devices are OK or if they need changes.


* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at symbios.com

More information about the T10 mailing list