Question about Normative document posted on the Mt. Fuji and

Curtis Stevens Curtis_Stevens at
Wed May 31 09:58:37 PDT 2000

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at, posted by:
* Curtis Stevens <Curtis_Stevens at>
I know I was not listed as one of your privileged hosts, but Phoenix and
Award both have special cases for ATAPI devices.  The command sets documents
in 8020, 8070, and 8090 are basically an agreement between device
implementers and host vendors on specific supported command set for the
ATAPI devices listed in the specs.  The MMC documents are a larger
collection of commands.  Some of the commands listed in MMC are not required
for ATAPI devices.  There are also some mode pages that are required for
ATAPI devices that can be optional for non-SCSI devices.

Phoenix Technologies LTD
Curtis E. Stevens
135 Technology Dr.
Irvine, Ca. 92618

Phone:	(949) 790-2121
Fax:	(949) 790-2003
Internet: Curtis_Stevens at Phoenix.COM

It's hard to understand how a cemetery raised it's burial cost and blamed it
on the cost of  living.

  -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hale Landis [mailto:hlandis at]
Sent:	Wednesday, May 31, 2000 8:50 AM
To:	t10 at; T13 at
Subject:	Re: Question about Normative document posted on the Mt. Fuji
and MMC2 lists Jan 30, '00

HL: Notice that I copied T10 on this reply.

On Wed, 31 May 2000 04:55:40 -0700, Ron Stephens wrote:
RS: >>>I have a copy of a document that was placed on the Mt. Fuji and
MMC2 reflectors by a Mr. Keiji Katata  Jan 30th, 2000. It is entitled
"Appendix B - ATAPI Implementation Notes". In it is discussed some ATAPI
particulars, but it properly references the T13 documents.<<<

HL: I'm sorry but I don't pay any attention to the SFF-8090 documents.
Until the SFF-8090 stuff in moved into a T10 document I don't consider it
to be "stable".

HL: It should be noted that the ONLY place a T10 document makes reference
to ATAPI is in an annex of MMC and MMC-2. And in my opinion that annex is
extremely confusing.  It uses terminology that is unique to MMC and/or
redefines terminology that is used in other SFF, SCSI or ATA/ATAPI
documents, especially it redefines terminology associated with "resets".
During the review period of  MMC-2 I asked that this be fixed but I don't
think anything was changed.

HL: If you are one of those people who thinks an ATAPI device can only be
an MMC device then I would guess you are happy with the way T10 deals with
ATAPI.  If you think ATAPI is one of the SCSI physical transport layers
and that an ATAPI device can be something other than an MMC device then
the MMC annex is the wrong place for T10 to make its only reference to
ATAPI. In my opinion T10 needs to update SAM, SPC, SBC, etc, to reference
ATA/ATAPI like any other physical transport (like it referneces 1394 for

think ATAPI devices are SCSI devices or does Microsoft think ATAPI devices
are some subset of SCSI or something very different from SCSI? Anyone else
have an opinion? What does Apple or Sun think?

RS: >>>So, my question goes out to you all: Were the people working on a
combination document aware of this Appendix (I'm assuming it was placed in
the MMC and MtFuji documents??). Maybe Hale can clarify this, as this was
an email sent to HIM and posted on that reflector, that I had somehow

HL: I am aware of the effort by Tony Goodfellow to produce a "consolidated
reference" for ATAPI. I just hope this effort does not produce yet another
description of ATAPI that has differences between the SFF and T13
documents. I am waiting for my "review copy". There has been some talk of
making this new document a T13 TR, but if it describes BOTH the ATAPI
protocol AND the MMC command set, then is T13 the right place for it? Is
T10 the right place for it?  If the ATAPI device designers in the Far East
continue to ignore the T10 and T13 documents and if they will continue to
use the SFF documents then maybe SFF is the place for this new document?

HL: I really don't know what to do about the "ATAPI mess". But I do think
that as long as SFF continues to produce documents that describe ATAPI
devices then the folks in the Far East will continue to ignore T10 and

RS: >>>How does this affect the consolidation efforts, or attempts to
"explain" things?<<<

HL: I'll let Tony answer this one.

+++ Hale Landis --- Niwot, CO USA --- +++
+++  hlandis at  ---  hlandis at  +++

* 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