================================================================================ 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 May 1, 2019 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 April 24, 2019 meeting. Randy Wolff moved to approve the minutes. Bob Ross seconded. The minutes were approved without objection. Review of ARs: - Mike LaBonte to send out the Touchstone industry survey. - Michael noted this was an implied AR and reported this was done Opens: - Randy asked if there was any discussion on the package model examples. Touchstone Industry Survey: Mike noted we have received 44 responses so far. We are still planning to close the survey on May 17th at midnight Eastern Time. Mike noted the average time to complete the survey is about 2 minutes 31 seconds and the completion rate is about 87% so far. In terms of promoting the survey, the emails sent to the IBIS List and SI List lacked the end date. Mike plans to send a reminder about the survey with the end date. He has posted the survey link to some social media groups, such as Janine Love's "Signal & Power Integrity Community" LinkedIn group, Bahram Afghani's "high speed board design and development" LinkedIn group, and Steven Waldstein's "Signal Integrity Engineering" LinkedIn group. He has seen some increase in responses due to these posts. Michael suggested to start discussing how we want to compile and evaluate the results. Bob commented the primary reason for the survey is to guide this committee and sharing the results would be a secondary outcome. We can share the results, but not commit to make any changes. Randy suggested to share the results of the survey and give the planned actions resulting from the survey, and this may bring in additional people to the discussion. Bob agreed we may get some additional involvement if there are areas of interest. Michael noted we have two weeks to discuss this before we need to make any decisions. He would like to report on the survey results by the June 7th Open Forum meeting. Mike commented, if we want to have some type of report, someone would need to compile it. One approach would be to show the results on the IBIS website as a PDF. Bob suggested to save the results before we cancel the SurveyMonkey account. He commented it will take some time to make formal decisions on what we want to do. Michael noted he has sent out the survey to people internally. Mike noted many of the "Touchstone users" are from the users of measurement hardware category rather than the measurement hardware vendors. He suggested to send the survey to Eric Bogatin and ask if he can promote it. Mike noted about 80% of people thus far have used Touchstone 2. Mike will post to the IBIS lists and SI List a reminder of the survey and note the end date [AR]. Mike suggested we could ask Eric if he can share the survey. Michael agreed to start the discussion. EMD Comments Review: Michael asked if we prefer to wait for Walter Katz to discuss this further. Bob asked if Walter would be the editor of the document and stated we will need to discuss this. Michael suggested to defer this discussion. IBIS-ISS Parser: Bob stated he has an AR to ping the parser developer and get his thoughts on an IBIS-ISS parser. We would need to decide how it would be packaged and if it is a part of IBISCHK or not. Michael asked about the timing of this with the IBISCHK7 work going on. Bob noted the timing could be an issue and that part of the project would be to develop regression tests. Mike suggested we could at least start the conversation. Bob suggested to ask for a ballpark estimate and ask what concerns the developer might have. Mike asked how urgent this would be and suggested we would not have to use the same developer. He prefers that the IBIS-ISS parser should be part of the IBISCHK. He noted Arpad had some good thoughts on the parser in the Quality task group meeting. Mike was concerned about how many purchases of the source code there would be. Michael suggested this can be discussed in other task groups. Bob suggested to use the same parser developer for this and integrate the function as part of IBISCHK. Next Meeting: The next meeting will be May 8. Mike moved to adjourn. Bob seconded. The meeting adjourned without objection. EMD Comments to be Resolved: 1. Change top level keywords to distinguish between EMD and Interconnect Models 2. Add Touchstone to the introduction 3. Clarify the meaning of signal_type 4. File format structure IBIS-ISS Parser: - Bob to contact the parser developer for initial thoughts