================================================================================

IBIS INTERCONNECT TASK GROUP
http://www.ibis.org/interconnect_wip/ 
Mailing list: ibis-interconnect@freelists.org 
Archives at http://www.freelists.org/archive/ibis-interconn/ 

================================================================================

Attendees from January 15, 2020 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio)

ANSYS                                Curtis Clark
Cadence Design Systems               Bradley Brim
Intel Corp.                          Michael Mirmak*
Keysight Technologies                Radek Biernacki
Mentor, A Siemens Business           Arpad Muranyi*
Micron Technology                    Justin Butterfield*, Randy Wolff*
SiSoft                               Walter Katz, Mike LaBonte
Teraspeed Labs                       Bob Ross*


Michael Mirmak convened the meeting.  No patents were declared. 
Justin Butterfield took minutes.


Review of Minutes:
- Michael called for review of the minutes from the January 8, 2020 meeting. 
  Bob Ross moved to approve the minutes.  Arpad Muranyi seconded.  The minutes 
  were approved without objection.


Review of ARs: 
- Michael to send out a draft 30.  
  - Michael reported this is done.
   

Opens:
 - None.
 

EMD draft 30 review:
Michael noted most of the changes he made were editorial.  There were some 
technical changes on page 7 in the section discussing netlists and CAD 
databases.  Matching signal_names would mean the signals are connected.  He 
changed the first bullet from the word "connected" to "associated with a 
common path".  

Michael asked if an extended net would allow the tool to know that the nets 
are connected, and how this applies to termination resistors when the extended 
net includes the power or ground.  Bob stated if you have a series resistor or 
capacitor the signal_names may be different, but they may be connected.  Bob 
noted the pins in the EMD pin list must be I/O pins only and not rails, and 
the connections must be across different interfaces.  He suggested to add 
these as qualifiers to this paragraph on page 7.  We do not assume a default 
short if the electrical model is missing.  Michael suggested to add I/O pins 
to the start of the first paragraph on page 7.  Bob noted we have different 
rules for rails, since they do not have extended nets.  Randy Wolff agreed 
that this paragraph applies to I/O pins.

Bob suggested to change the word "requirements" to "features" on page 7, as 
the requirements are listed elsewhere.  Bob asked if EMDs are defined by 
boundaries or interfaces.  Michael responded the word "boundaries" is used in 
one sentence on page 7.  He suggested to add the word "interfaces" to this 
sentence.  Michael also noted that "interfaces" is not yet defined, other than 
a mention on page 19.  Randy noted we also have the phrases "EMD interface" 
and "designator interface".  Bob noted this section is the EMD Module 
Description, but it is discussing the EMD Group and does not get into the 
details of the terminals.  Bob suggested this rules section is misplaced in 
the document and it would be better to move the rules toward the end.  Michael 
also suggested to keep the text somewhat generic in the introduction.  Randy 
noted the picture he is working on would go well with the section discussing 
the extended nets.  Michael agreed and added a note to the draft on where to 
insert the picture.

Bob suggested, on page 12 under designator pin list, there is a missing end of 
line.  Bob also noted [Designator Pin Map] is an undefined keyword on page 
10.  Bob asked what U23 and U24 from the example should be called, and if 
these are called designators or designator names.  Randy commented 
"designator" is a common term to refer to these in the CAD database.  Michael 
noted we mention "reference designator" in the document.  Randy noted 
"reference designator" is only used 3 times, and he suggested to change these 
to "designator".  Bob noted that "designator" is the first column of the 
keyword.  Michael suggested to add an also known as for EMD designators to 
reference designators on page 11.  Randy noted we first talk about designator 
in the introduction on page 7.

Bob stated his main concern is what to call the designator column entry.  We 
use the wording designator dot something to define the pin.  He would be okay 
with keeping the term designator.  Michael asked if we need to have any term 
to distinguish between EMD designator and designator.  Bob thought we should 
keep the list of EMD pins and designator pins.  Michael asked if we should use 
the term EMD designator.  Randy suggested to change the column heading to EMD 
Designator on page 11. 

Michael commented the first paragraph on page 7 should come later in the 
document.  Bob agreed noting there is too much detail in the introduction on 
terms that need defined.

Michael stated that next week we need to decide if we want to go ahead to 
issue a BIRD number.  We should prioritize what we need to resolve between now 
and the next meeting.  He would like to have a good baseline for the BIRD.  
Bob noted we can assign BIRD 202.

Michael will send out EMD draft 31 [AR].


Next Meeting:
The next meeting will be January 22.


Randy moved to adjourn.  Arpad Muranyi seconded.  The meeting adjourned without 
objection.

================================================================================
Bin List:

EMD Comments to be Resolved:


IBIS-ISS Parser:
- IBIS-ISS parser scope document