SBP-2 Study Group

Scott Smyers scott.smyers at
Tue Aug 8 17:20:07 PDT 2000

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at, posted by:
* Scott Smyers <scott.smyers at>

I request that you reserve time on the AVWG agenda to present the results
of your study group meeting and to discuss the technical and standards
issues in general.

I know there is interest in the TA in this general area (particularly the
isochronous part) and your study group meeting in T10 followed by a report
to the AVWG could spur an offline meeting in Seattle to talk about what
work is needed, how, when and where is the most appropriate way to get the
work done, and how to coordinate the possibly multiple foci of activities
and interests.



At 04:07 PM 8/3/00 -0600, BERKEMA,ALAN C (HP-Roseville,ex1) wrote:
 >* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at, posted by:
 >* "BERKEMA,ALAN C (HP-Roseville,ex1)" <alan_berkema at>
 >The biggest criticism I always get about SBP-2 is that it is
 >Master/Slave (Initiator/Target) in a world where many
 >appliances might prefer to operate peer to peer. I realize
 >that for SBP-2 this also has many advantages.
 >Any chance of discussing alternative ways to address this issue?
 >Besides just saying that a device support both roles.
 >Alan Berkema
 >Engineer Scientist
 >Hewlett Packard MS# 5558
 >8000 Foothills Blvd
 >Roseville California
 >Phone 916 785-5605
 >Fax   916 785-1968
 >-----Original Message-----
 >From: Peter Johansson [mailto:PJohansson at]
 >Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 1:53 PM
 >To: NCITS T10
 >Cc: IEEE 1394; 1394 TA; P1394.3
 >Subject: SBP-2 Study Group
 >With the approval of the T10 Chair, I intend to convene a study group to
 >discuss amendment, extension or revision of SBP-2. The meeting will take
 >place in Huntington Beach, CA, during the T10 meeting the week of September
 >11 - 15, 2000.
 >THE PURPOSE of this message is TO POLL prospective participants with
 >respect to one of two meeting times:
 >A) 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM, Wednesday, September 13
 >         --- OR ---
 >B) 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM, Friday, September 15
 >Note that in both cases the meeting is likely to be much shorter, on the
 >order of two to four hours. The times I give above are merely the maximum
 >time we would have a room.
 >A possible negative against choice A) is that the SCSI CAP meeting occurs
 >concurrently (we may lose some otherwise interested parties to that working
 >group) while a possible negative against choice B) is that many T10
 >participants would rather be gone by Friday (at least it's an AM meeting,
 >so you can catch a flight home). If the study group meeting is not too
 >long, perhaps it's possible to arrange the CAP agenda to avoid conflict of
 >To help you assess your interest in this study group, a tentative agenda
 >for discussion is:
 >a) Reduced start-up latency from idle condition
 >b) Explicit description of how to transport 16-byte or larger CDBs
 >c) SBP modifications necessary for IEEE P1394.1 environment (Serial Bus
 >d) Isochronous facilities in SBP
 >e) Bi-directional data transfer (new ORB type)
 >f) Other items suggested by participants
 >There would be educational presentations made on a) and c) above.
 >The goal of the study group is to determine if a new work item should be
 >initiated and, if so, what should be its scope.
 >I have copied this to more than just the T10 reflector because possible
 >revisions to SBP-2 are of interest to a wider audience.
 >PLEASE RESPOND DIRECTLY TO ME and keep the reflectors uncluttered.
 >Peter Johansson
 >Congruent Software, Inc.
 >98 Colorado Avenue
 >Berkeley, CA  94707
 >(510) 527-3926
 >(510) 527-3856 FAX
 >PJohansson at
 >* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
 >* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at

Scott Smyers
VP Interconnect Architecture Lab
Sony Electronics, Inc.

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

More information about the T10 mailing list