================================================================================ 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 June 27, 2018 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 May 30 meeting. Randy Wolff moved to approve the minutes. Walter Katz seconded. The minutes were approved without objection. Review of ARs: - Walter to work on an EMD draft after BIRD189 is approved [AR]. - Walter noted he would like to wait until BIRD189 is officially approved before starting this. Michael agreed with this approach. Opens: - Bob Ross noted some of the comments we received require editorial changes, but we need to decide if we need to issue a BIRD189.7. Arpad Muranyi asked if the issues can be resolved as part of the Editorial task group work. Michael suggested that we can vote on BIRD189 with the noted changes. Bob commented that two of the three changes are editorial, but one of the issues could require more substantial changes. Arpad asked if we need to delay the vote on BIRD189. Michael replied that we need to decide this. Arpad noted that the proposed changes would satisfy the original questions he had posed. Discussion (Email subject: Re: Comments received on Interconnect BIRD189.6): Arpad noted he sent the email based on some comments he received internally, and he had exchanged some emails with Bob on how to resolve the issues. Michael stated that item #3 in the email is regarding the sentence: "[Package Model] and [Interconnect Model Group] may both be present for the same [Component] but should not both be used at the same time." He noted the email chain agreed to change the end of the sentence to "should not both be used simultaneously in simulation for the same interconnect." This could be done as an editorial change. Michael stated the problem is if we submit a BIRD189.7, it will delay the vote, and he would like to get away with not delaying the vote. Bob stated, for item #1 from Arpad's email comments, if we need to change this, it could be a significant change. The suggestion is if we need to rewrite this, then it would probably require issuing a BIRD189.7. For item #2, Michael noted this was a clarification, but the text does not necessarily need to change. Arpad stated that this was more a question, and it might be nice to have some examples or additional text. We discussed these items in detail, but there is no text in the BIRD. Bob stated we do not have rules about overlapping with legacy package models, and we leave this open in the BIRD. Bob stated, for item #1, we are combining two different formats and that is confusing. We are mixing how the *ref and Buffer_rail terminals are identified. Walter stated, in his opinion, the paragraph is valid, but it could be worded better to clarify the intent. Michael asked what would need to be changed to clarify the text in the BIRD. Arpad noted the problem is the sentence makes it seems like *_ref and Buffer_Rail can be identified by a signal_name or bus_label. The *_ref terminals need to be identified by the pin_name, and the Buffer_rail can be identified by signal_name or bus_label. Walter agreed that this is a clarification, and he is okay with it. Arpad suggested to change the sentence to say the *_ref should be identified with pin_name. And, a second sentence added stating the Buffer_Rail can be identified by a signal_name or bus_label. Michael suggested that the rest of the text can be deleted. Bob agreed. Michael noted that Table 41 is still correct. Michael summarized that there are only three changes on pages 8 and 15. Bob commented that these changes are editorial. Michael asked if the changes would resolve the comments Arpad sent. Arpad agreed that they would satisfy the concerns from his side. Michael suggested that he can come up with a summary of the changes, and we can vote on BIRD189.6 noting the editorial changes. Bob agreed and stated we can post a BIRD189.7 with the changes. Bob noted, on page 28, Randy had suggested to fix a sentence which is missing the word "a". Michael agreed to include this change in his summary. Bob requested, on page 11, to delete the note about reviewing the examples. Michael agreed with this as well. Michael will write a one page summary of editorial changes to be included in the vote for BIRD189.6 [AR]. These editorial changes will be included as part of BIRD189.7 for official approval. Bob suggested to send this out to the IBIS reflector. Michael noted that we expect to have BIRD189 approved on Friday June 29 and asked if we want to start the EMD discussion or if we want to focus on the editorial work. Walter stated he can start on the EMD draft in parallel. Bob asked if we will consider additional BIRDs for IBIS 7.0. Michael suggested that we take this up in the IBIS Open Forum. Next Meeting: The next meeting is TBD. Arpad moved to adjourn. Randy seconded. The meeting adjourned without objection.