Fuji Email Voting Notice for NLJA issue

Shunsuke Kimura shunsuke.kimura at toshiba.co.jp
Tue Jul 26 22:07:17 PDT 2005


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Shunsuke Kimura <shunsuke.kimura at toshiba.co.jp>
*
Dear Katata-san,

 The following is TOSHIBA's opinion.

" Option A: Keep current Fuji description"


Best Regards,
Shunsuke Kimura, Toshiba


keiji_katata at post.pioneer.co.jp さんは書きました:
>
>Hi all,
>
>This is Fuji Email Voting notice about NLJA issue that is discussed in July
>meeting.
>I apologize the delay of this notice. This should be sent at July 13th. But
>Kohda and I could not access our office Email system from USA by some
>technical problem. So I send this now in Japan.
>
>I have changed the Due date because delay of this notice.
>I also attached DOC file that has same content. It may be easy to read.
>
>Please send any comment or question to Fuji reflector.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Keiji Katata
>PIONEER CORP.
>
>---- Voting Notice ----
>Comment for Dual layer model section:
>
>Host application people are confused by the current Fuji description.
>When no more LJ is available (no recordable area on layer 0 in an RZone),
>NLJA (Next Layer Jump Address) field of RTI (Read Track Information)
>command reports zero. Host does not understand how to detect the end
>address of user data recordable area using the NLJA field.
>In the July Mt. Fuji discussion, there were two options for Fuji members to
>solve this confusion.
>
>Option A: Keep current Fuji description
>
>Host software should use ordinary sequential recording method to calculate
>the end address of recordable area using the number of free blocks
>information and NWA information of RTI command. In case of ordinary
>sequential recording (CD-R, DVD-R Single Layer), the end address of the
>recordable area is calculated by NWA + number of free blocks - 1.
>
>Solution for Option A:
>
>Add an explanation to clarify this method for Layer Jump recording model.
>Keep the current definition of the NLJA field of RTI command and keep the
>current model section.
>
>Option B: Change the definition of the NLJA field of RTI command
>
>The definition of the NLJA field of RTI command should be changed to show
>the end address of the user data recordable area in an RZone only when no
>more LJ is available.
>
>Solution for Option B:
>
>Change the definition of the NLJA field of RTI command.
>Change the part that relates to the field in the model section.
>Add the explanation of the method to detect the condition that no more
>layer jump is possible. (NLJA field does not report this condition when
>option B is adopted.)
>
>Action Item:
>
>We need opinions from ISVs and other members. Chairman asks this issue via
>Fuji/T10 reflector. Simple majority will be taken to determine option A or
>option B.
>If the option B is selected, chairman will call the August meeting (it may
>be in Japan). Ai san of Panasonic will make modification proposal for
>Command section and he will make a brief modification proposal for DVD-R
>Dual Layer model section.
>
>Due date:
>
>Send this issue by the Thursday night 15 July 2005. (Japan)
>Email voting period is 2 weeks. = ends on 29 July, 2005
>One vote per one entity.
>Simple majority is used.
>Only the vote for option A or vote for option B are counted. Other voting
>and abstain are not counted at all. No-response is regarded as abstain.
>
>Comments in the July Mt. Fuji meeting:
>
>Direct address information of the end address of recordable area is better
>method than the indirect address information calculated from number of free
>blocks and NWA.
>
>The confusion is not caused by a technical problem. Host software can use
>current RTI command to detect the end address of recordable area on the
>Layer 1.
>
>Several host software vendors have released their products on the market.
>At least one drive vendor has released its products on the market.
>Technical change may not be acceptable for them.
>
>September MMC WG is the target date to submit the final Fuji Specification
>document to MMC Standard. The technical changes may cause schedule delay.
>
>------------------------
>(See attached file: Comment for Dual layer model section_2.doc)
*
* 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