SAS 1,5 Gbps maximum voltage level change?

John Lohmeyer lohmeyer at
Wed Jun 18 08:25:14 PDT 2003

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at, posted by:
* John Lohmeyer <lohmeyer at>

I agree that we need to move to the 1600 mV pk-pk maximum signal level. This is clearly a substantive change. Rob has also identified a few other issues in SAS. Some of these issues are editorial but some are arguably substantive. Substantive changes must be approved by due process.

Within the ANSI/INCITS procedures, we have 3 options:

  a) Change SAS version 1.0;
  b) Write an amendment to SAS version 1.0 to correct the "defect(s)";  or
  c) Incorporate the substantive change(s) into SAS-1.1.

In discussing the schedule for these options, I am assuming that we (T10 and the Technical Editor, Rob) move quickly so as not to miss any deadlines. Our current schedule for publishing SAS is September or October.

Option a) would cause another public review period; SAS would be published in December. Option b) would continue the base SAS standard on the current schedule, but the amendment would be published early next year. Option c) means SAS version 1.0 (without any substantive changes) would be published on the current schedule. SAS-1.1 would remain on its existing schedule to be published in early 2005.

If we pick option a), we will need to forward the revised SAS draft standard at our July 10th T10 meeting to meet this schedule.

By the way, we do not need to submit public review comments for any of these changes since T10 will be meeting the week the SAS public review ends. The INCITS Secretariat already knows that we are contemplating these options and will wait for T10's input on July 10th.

Finally, while ANSI does permit an erratum, it is restricted to editorial changes only.


At 6/17/2003 01:12 PM, Sheffield, Robert L wrote:
>* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at, posted by:
>* "Sheffield, Robert L" <robert.l.sheffield at>
>I agree with your suggestion to modify the SAS 1,5 Gbps maximum signal level to 1600 mV pk-pk. I think this will help not only in providing more consistency between 1.5 Gbps and 3.0 Gbps SAS, but it also makes it easier for devices (like expander devices) that may support both SATA and SAS protocols. 
>Should this be fixed in SAS-1.1, or should it be applied as an erratum to SAS-1.0?
>-----Original Message deleted -----

John Lohmeyer                  Email: lohmeyer at
LSI Logic Corp.                Voice: +1-719-533-7560
4420 ArrowsWest Dr.
Colo Spgs, CO 80907

* 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