======================================================================
IBIS INTERCONNECT MODELING AD HOC TASK GROUP MEETING MINUTES AND AGENDA

http://www.eda.org/ibis/adhoc/interconnect/

Mailing list: ibis-interconn@freelists.org

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

Minutes from July 22

Attendees (incomplete):
----------
(* denotes present)
Agilent                    - Radek Biernacki*, John Moore, Ken Wong
Ansoft                     - Denis Soldo
Cadence Design Systems     - Terry Jernberg, Brad Griffin
Cisco Systems              - Mike LaBonte
Green Streak Programs      - Lynne Green
Hewlett-Packard            - Rob Elliott
Intel                      - Michael Mirmak*
Mentor Graphics Corp.      - John Angulo, Vladimir Dmitriev-Zdorov*
Micron Technology          - Randy Wolff
Sigrity                    - Sam Chitwood, Raymond Y. Chen, Tao Su, Brad Brim*
SiSoft                     - Walter Katz*
Teraspeed Consulting Group - Bob Ross*

======================================================================
No patents were declared.

Radek summarized his latest proposal, which consists of fields separated by a colon under a single keyword.  For example, using Walter's "framis" language:


[Sparse Matrix Entries]
(1,1) (2,2) (3,3) (4,4) (5,5) : (1,5) : (3,1)

[End Sparse Matrix Entries] 

Each colon-separated group (in this case, three) is a "framis", defines a group all using the same network data pair.  Each pairstates which entries in the full [Network Data] matrix are duplicates.  For the same example:

[Network Data]
|Freq  Framis     Framis   Framis
20e9   27 0.34    2 0.8    55 0.1

[End Network Data]

Radek suggested that identifications (names) not be used.  Walter responded that all recent proposals were equivalent and that he preferred names.  Radek replied that these could be machine-generated outside of the file format.

Bob noted that this representation was the most reduced yet.  It uses reference by position to [Network Data].

Walter asked whether the number of framises could be placed after the keyword.  Radek responded that this could certainly be done and was present in an earlier version.  Bob suggested this should be a keyword, but that the current sparse matrix keyword should be kept as a begin/end block.  He also suggested adding parentheses as separators and adding an identifier.

Michael asked about conflicts with mixed-mode and upper/lower functions in the existing document.  Walter and Bob agreed that upper/lower would not be problematic, but Radek suggested these not be allowed.  Vladimir suggested that symmetry was a separate issue.

Brad asked about reciprocity of the matrix, suggesting that this might force writing of (1,5) and (5,1) as separate values.  

Michael asked how this would be written up.  Radek requested that the definitions be unambiguous.  John proposed a sub-parameter for symmetry, but Bob stated his opposition to subparameters.

Brad suggested a rule to prevent identical pairs appearing in different framises.  Vladimir and Radek agreed that mixed-mode  still has no serious impact on sparse matrices.

ARs
Michael - write up proposal