================================================================================ IBIS INTERCONNECT TASK GROUP https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ibis.org_interconnect-5Fwip_&d=DwIGAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=DcQR-qLpQg5lIreuM6-NYECRIAFXt268PRNS5WO043M&m=3MPBifgxKoUTC0JEpuzBW8I-DprQBYNsnYdOJQcfIV4Yoxkv54OeXpIeMGMXjUjy&s=hRYA1kaTIT8PQ0yxG3AFu1_c4PO71nGL1WoATcQvpjg&e= Mailing list: ibis-interconnect@freelists.org Archives at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.freelists.org_archive_ibis-2Dinterconn_&d=DwIGAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=DcQR-qLpQg5lIreuM6-NYECRIAFXt268PRNS5WO043M&m=3MPBifgxKoUTC0JEpuzBW8I-DprQBYNsnYdOJQcfIV4Yoxkv54OeXpIeMGMXjUjy&s=5cBtaTRYaZU_kRuoCCcq9Hla44-wZXTZwZKU2FaFpGk&e= ================================================================================ Attendees from February 15, 2023 Meeting (* means attended at least using audio) ANSYS Curtis Clark Intel Corp. Michael Mirmak* Michael Brownell Keysight Technologies Ming Yan Marvell Steve Parker* MathWorks Walter Katz Micron Technology Justin Butterfield* Randy Wolff* Siemens EDA Arpad Muranyi* ST Microelectronics Aurora Sanna Teraspeed Labs Bob Ross* University of Illinois Jose Schutt-Aine Zuken USA Lance Wang 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 February 8, 2023 meeting. Michael displayed the minutes. Randy Wolff moved to approve the minutes. Arpad Muranyi seconded. The minutes were approved without objection. Review of ARs: - Arpad Muranyi to give an example of the physical connectivity needed for EMD automation [AR]. - Arpad suggested to keep this open. He is waiting until we get to this discussion topic. - Michael to check with Synopsys on permission for using the W-element S-parameter feature and what they can share on the algorithm details and model restrictions [AR]. - Michael is still working on this, and it will take some time. He is trying to get Ted Mido to join this meeting. - Michael to look for the original Touchstone manual [AR]. - Michael reported he only had partial success. It seems that the manual has been taken down. There is a lot of information available on the Touchstone simulator. He suggested to keep this open. We could ask Keysight folks if need be. - Randy will send out again the latest separation draft. - Michael noted this was done. Opens: - Michael organized the bin list in priority order, as we discussed last meeting. Randy asked about the document outline, which is last in the bin list. Michael replied it is last, since we need to resolve the technical and formating changes first. Discussion: Touchstone Separated version 1.0 and 2.0 draft: Arpad shared the latest copy of the document with the highlighted text, where we need to address possible wording changes. The cyan color is newly highlighted text, and the yellow color is the previously highlighted text. In the Touchstone 1 section, we seem to use "resistance", "reference", and "impedance" interchangeably. Arpad suggested we will want to make the language more consistent. Michael asked about the Single-Ended Network Parameter Data, which is a section heading. Bob Ross thought this had been moved in the document. Randy noted this in the Touchstone 1 table of contents and there is a Mixed Mode section in the Touchstone 2 section. Michael noted the Single-Ended Network Parameter Data is in the Touchstone 2 table of contents but not in the Touchstone 1 table of contents. Arpad noted there is a consistency issue with stating Touchstone 1 and 2 vs. Version 1 and 2. He noted Touchstone Version 2 is also used in a few places. Arpad noted that there is also discussion of the Option line in the Touchstone 2 section. We would need to decide on the technical change related to the Option line in Touchstone 3. Arpad stated that there are several mentions of Touchstone 1 in the Touchstone 2 section. Michael commented that possibly this text can be deleted. Arpad commented that the main issue is how to make the information coexist. We could add a new keyword to wrap the Touchstone 1 syntax. Bob stated we have the original Touchstone 1 that does not have a Version keyword. The exercise of splitting the Touchstone 1 and Touchstone 2 sections was so that we can see the interaction between the sections. Bob suggested we could have plug-in modules for new features. He was concerned that wrapping or encapsulating is a dangerous concept, since there is no Version keyword. The issue is reading the Touchstone files in existing software. Michael was concerned that encapsulating or wrapping the Touchstone data will still break existing software. Randy stated the only safe way to add details to Touchstone 1 is in comments. The only reason to wrap the Touchstone 1 data is to keep existing datasets. Arpad asked if there is a reason to keep Touchstone 1 in its original format. Michael gave an example, if he has a Touchstone 1 file and wants to have Touchstone 2 features, he cannot do that without adding all the additional keywords. Arpad has seen non-compliant Touchstone 1 files which have reference impedance per port. This indicates there is a need to keep the Touchstone 1 format but add new features. Bob commented the big decision for Touchstone 2 was to add the keywords to specification. The issue is that the Touchstone 2 specification allows Touchstone 1 files with no keywords. Arpad suggested we might not need to encapsulate the Touchstone 1 syntax. Michael stated we are saying that, in Touchstone 3, all Touchstone 2 keywords become optional. We are talking about supporting new features without adding any of the Touchstone 2 keywords. Randy thought we might want to support a Touchstone 1 file with port naming, and we could have a file reference to the original Touchstone 1 file with no formatting changes. Bob agreed this could work. Arpad stated this could work the same as the encapsulation. Michael noted we need to close on whether we need to continue with the separation draft. He suggested the file reference idea is the best option. Michael will ask if there is any need from Walter Katz to support Touchstone 1 files with port mapping [AR]. Randy moved to adjourn. Arpad seconded. Next Meeting: The next meeting will be February 22, 2023. ================================================================================ Bin List: 1. Draft Touchstone document separating version 1.0 and 2.0 2. Encapsulating Touchstone 1.0 data 3. Touchstone 2.0 draft with TSIRD3 and TSIRD4 4. Pole-residue format 5. Port naming 6. Alternatives to the Touchstone 1.0 option line 7. Enable Cascading of S-parameters Through W-element 8. Touchstone 3.0 draft outline (dependent on several items above)