DATE: 8/10/99 SUBJECT: 8/6/99 EIA IBIS Open Forum Meeting Minutes VOTING MEMBERS AND 1999 PARTICIPANTS LIST: AMP (Martin Freedman) Applied Simulation Technology Raj Raghuram*, Norio Matsui, Neven Orhanovic, Fred Ballesteri Avanti Nikolai Bannov Cadence Design Mike LaBonte* Cisco Systems Syed Huq Compaq Bob Haller*, Steve Coe, Shafir Rahman, Maher Elasad Cypress (Rajesh Manapat) EMC Corporation Fabrizio Zanella Fairchild Semiconductor [Peter LaFlamme], Craig Klem H.A.S. Electronics (Haruny Said) Hewlett Packard (EEsof, etc.) Paul Gregory, Henry Wu High Design Technology Razvan Ene HyperLynx (& Pads Software) Matthew Flora*, Kellee Crisafulli, Lynne Green, John Angulo* IBM Greg Edlund, Michael Cohen*, Praven Patel Incases Olaf Rethmeier, Werner Rissiek, David Eagles, Wilhelm Arnoldi, Ulrich Losch Intel Corporation Stephen Peters*, Arpad Muranyi*, Frank Kern, Martin Chang, Dave Moxley, Kerry Nelson, Jeff Day, Richard Mellitz, Peter Liou, Will Hobbs, Henri Maramis LSI Logic (Symbios Logic) Scott King Mentor Graphics Bob Ross*, Mohamed Mahmoud, Sherif Hammad, Jean Oudinot, Markku Kukkanen, Martin Groeber, Karine Loudet, Hisham Gamal, Evgeny Wasserman Mitsubishi (Tam Cao) Motorola (Ron Werner) National Semiconductor Milt Schwartz North East Systems Associates Edward Sayre, Michael Baxter, Kathy Breda NEC (Hiroshi Matsumoto) Philips Semiconductor Todd Andersen, Peter Christiaans Quantic EMC (Mike Ventham) Siemens Bernhard Unger, Christian Mitschke, Manfred Maurer, Peter Kaiser, Wolfram Meyer, Gerald Bannert, Harmut Ibowski, Katja Zuleeg, Hans Pichlmaier, Eckhard Lenski, Kortheuer Udo, Christian Sporrer SiQual Scott McMorrow Texas Instruments Jean-Claude Perrin, Shankar Balasubramaniah, Ramzi Ammar, Thomas Fisher Thomson-CSF (Jean Lebrun) Time Domain Analysis Systems Dima Smolyansky Viewlogic Systems Chris Rokusek*, Guy de Burgh*, Cary Mandel, (Jon Powell) VeriBest Ian Dodd* VLSI Technology D.C. Sessions* Zuken-Redac (John Berrie) OTHER PARTICIPANTS IN 1999: 3Dfx Interactive Ken Wu Actel Corporation Silvia Montoya Alcatel Steven Criel Analytical Edge Robert Easson Applied Microelectronics Brian Sanderson BMW Friedrich Haslinger Bogatin Enterprise Eric Bogatin Bosch Telecom Detlef Wolf Celestica Danny Da Silva ECI Telecom Daniel Adar EIA [Patti Rusher], Cecilia Fleming*, Dan Heinemeier Electronique Catherine Gross EFM Consulting Ekkehard Miersch FCI John Ellis Hitachi ULSI Hideki Fukuda Infineon Thomas Latzel Intracon Design Mike Osmond Litton Systems Robert Bremer Matsushita Atsuji Itoh Molex Incorporated Gus Panella Nortel Networks Martin Hall (& at Viewlogic), Calvin Trowell Oce Printing Systems Ernst Deiringer Praegitzer Design Rick Newell Rockwell Collins Susan Tweeton, Ron Hau Samsung Jung-Gun Byun, Cheol-Seung Choi Shindengen Tsuyoshi Horigome Signals & Systems Engineering Tom Hawkins STMicroelectronics Fabrice Boissieres, Philippe LeFevre StorageTek Nick Krull Sun Microsystems Victor Chang, Kevin Ko Tektronix Tom Brinkoetter Teradyne Mikhail Khusid VDOL Robert Novosel Xilinx Susan Wu (Unaffiliated, Retired) Bruce Wenniger In the list above, attendees at the meeting are indicated by *. Principal members or other active members who have not attended are in parentheses. Participants who no longer are in the organization are in square brackets. Upcoming Meetings: The bridge numbers for future IBIS teleconferences are as follows: Date Bridge Number Reservation # Passcode August 20, 1999 (916) 356-9200 8-34300 1159828 All meetings are 8:00 AM to 9:55 AM Pacific Time. We try to have agendas out 7 days before each Open Forum and meeting minutes out within 7 days after. When you call into the meeting, ask for the IBIS Open Forum hosted by Will Hobbs and give the reservation number and passcode. NOTE: "AR" = Action Required. -------------------------------- MINUTES ------------------------------------- INTRODUCTIONS AND MEETING QUORUM John Angulo from HyperLynx is on the simulator team and wants to learn about IBIS. Bob Ross noted that we probably have been in compliance with formal EIA committee quorum requirements since the quorum is based on actual company participation at meetings. We have had a core group of about twelve to fifteen companies, so the actual quorum needed is about seven or eight member companies to conduct formal business. MEMBERSHIP UPDATE AND TREASURER'S REPORT Bob stated that we will start the process of updating the Roster page and also at the same time get the names of the primary and secondary representatives for each Member company, as required by EIA. Guy de Burgh will work with Syed Huq and assist in this process. REVIEW OF MINUTES AND AR'S Bob Ross made a change in the uploaded July 23, 1999 Minutes in response to a correction from Michael Cohen. Bob changed "whamming" to "WANning" as the abbreviation for Wide Area Network. The revised text in this section of last meetings Minutes is shown below: Bob Ross asked Michael Cohen whether he needed the clarification about "WANning" related to the s2ibis2/3 discussion in the May 28, 1999 IBIS Minutes. Michael stated that he did not think this was necessary since he had already sent a clarification statement to the IBIS reflector. The IBIS Minutes of May 28, 1999 were approved without modification. With this correction, the July 23, 1999 Minutes were approved. Bob noted that work is being done, but the following AR's in this section are still open: AR - Bob Ross and Cecilia Fleming research what is needed to align the IBIS bylaws with EP-20. AR - Bob Ross and Cecilia write position definitions for the new positions of Webmaster and Postmaster. Other AR's will be discussed during the meeting. MISCELLANY/ANNOUNCEMENTS None. PRESS AND WEB PAGE UPDATES None. NEW MODELS AVAILABLE, LIBRARY UPDATE None. OPENS FOR NEW ISSUES Bob Ross on BIRD59 - Model Spec Diagrams Bob Ross on BIRD60 - Electrical Board Description Diagrams Bob Ross on Other Version 3.2 Proposed Changes INTERNATIONAL/EXTERNAL PROGRESS - IEC 62014-1 (IBIS Version 2.1) - Cecilia Fleming reported that the comment responses to the letter ballot were sent to IEC. She does not expect a response for about three weeks. - pr EIAJ ED-5302 Standard for I/O Interface Model for Integrated Circuits (IMIC) - Bob Ross had no further report. - IEC 93/67/NP IBIS and EMC Simulation - Bob Ross had no further report - JC-16.2 Subcommittee: Modeling and Test - D.C. Sessions had no further report. ANSI LETTER BALLOT REPORT ON IBIS VERSION 3.2 Cecilia Fleming reported that the balloting period closed on August 3, 1999. No comments were received. This means that ANSI will approve the revised Version 3.2 document. She also commented as reported in the July 23, 1999 Minutes that the EIA letter ballot vote was 18 Yes and 0 No. Five Yes votes had comments. Once the comments are addressed, the acceptance process of IBIS Version 3.2 as EIA-656-A and then as ANSI/EIA-656-A is just a matter of sending the comment responses and revised document. S2IBIS3 COMMITTEE REPORT Michael Cohen reported that the next task group meeting is scheduled on Friday, August 13, 1999 and asked Bob Ross to get the teleconference bridge. IBIS (EAST) USERS GROUP MEETINGS Bob Ross reported that an initial notice should be sent in mid to late August 1999 for the meeting on October 14, 1999 in Marlborough, MA. Planning will begin after Kathy Breda returns from vacation. COOKBOOK STATUS Stephen Peters had no report. IBIS MODEL REVIEW COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Matthew Flora may send out the new model he received depending upon the type of review needed. BIRD59 - MODEL SPEC DIAGRAMS Bob Ross introduced BIRD59 to deal with two letter ballot comments on SP-4557 to be discussed later. Since the comments involved diagrams and minor text corrections, the BIRD process is followed to provide formal review of the proposed changes. Bob indicated he plans to issue BIRD59.1 to refine one of the diagrams. Also, the letter ballot responses will reference BIRD59.1. Matthew Flora raised the issue that he was still confused with how the hysteresis input is supposed to switch. Bob noted that the "x" point on the rising waveform and falling waveform indicated the minimum and maximum switching points for each edge. This was not noted on the diagram since text graphics can get very complicated with too much information. Raj Raghuram suggested adding another Input/Output switching diagram that is typically found in data books for clarification. D.C. Sessions suggested a table which is easier to produce. Bob indicated that he really did not want to get to bogged down in adding added diagrams or technical explanations. Hysteresis type inputs are well-known in industry, particularly with respect to ASIC input buffers. They are to as Schmitt trigger inputs. Bob also noted that the example provides some further information. Bob suggested that we add a reference to Schmitt triggers to help clarify this section. Bob will issue immediate BIRD59.1 with implementation of the above changes for further review and a planned vote at the next IBIS meeting. AR - Bob Ross issue BIRD59.1 with the changes discussed by August 6, 1999. [Done] BIRD60 - ELECTRICAL BOARD DESCRIPTION DIAGRAMS Bob Ross introduced BIRD60 to deal with a letter ballot comment on SP-4557 to be discussed later. BIRD60 formally documents for review the three diagrams that are planned to illustrate the EBD paths in the example. We plan to vote on BIRD60. The letter ballot response will reference BIRD60. SP-4557 LETTER BALLOT COMMENTS Bob Ross commented that based on the formal votes at the July 23, 1999 meeting, formal letter ballot responses to comments on SP-4557 have been sent to Mentor Graphics and to Anigma, Inc. Cecilia Fleming stated that she has received copies. Draft responses to comments from Intel Corporation and Cisco Systems were also discussed at the July 23, 1999 meeting. Since they contained many more items and were sent out only days before the meeting, Bob did not call for a vote on the responses. Bob stated that the plan for this meeting was to do the following: Review, discuss and vote on the Intel Corporation responses Review, discuss and vote on the Cisco Systems responses Review and discuss the SiQual, Inc. proposed responses that have just been distributed on the IBIS reflector will be in these Minutes. The final discussion and vote on the responses will be scheduled for the next meeting. Discuss any other (minor) editorial comments and corrections on IBIS Version 3.2. Based on the results of this meeting, Bob plans to upload two documents for review by August 6, 1999 to provide a two week review period before the next meeting. These documents will be in the Work in Progress directory: http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/ ver3_2g.ibs - UNOFFICIAL draft document of IBIS Version 3.2 showing the changes based on responses we have approved and also based on the SiQual responses we have discussed and other pending responses to be approved. ver3_2.ibs - UNOFFICIAL draft document of the release document that has the changes shown in the ver3_2g.ibs document implemented. Bob asked Arpad Muranyi to then provide as soon as possible an Acrobat formatted UNOFFICIAL draft ver3_2.pdf document for review. Bob also plans to upload this more readable version of the ver3_2.ibs document in the Work in Progress directory for review. The review will give us an opportunity to make minor editorial corrections on these prior to a formal scheduled for the next meeting. BIRD59.1 and BIRD60 just discussed will also be voted on. AR - Bob Ross upload the UNOFFICIAL ver3_2g.ibs and ver3_2.ibs in the http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/wip/ directory by August 6, 1999. [Done] AR - Arpad Muranyi produce the UNOFFICIAL ver3_2.pdf document and Bob Ross upload it as soon as possible in the http://www.eda.org/pub/ibis/wip/ directory. INTEL CORPORATION LETTER BALLOT RESPONSES Bob Ross reviewed the letter ballot comments and draft responses from Intel Corporation. They are listed below, as given in the July 23, 1999 Minutes: ------ Intel: 1 Editorial Suggested Change: Remove any reference to "tab" in the phrase "must be separated by at least one white space or tab character". This occurs throughout the document. Response: We agree with this suggest change. Only "white space" will be used. Also, in some locations a subsequent sentence related to not recommending using the "tab" character will be removed since it is now out of context. Note: This text has existed since Version 1.1. Intel: 2 Editorial Reference: Page 42 Suggested Change: Is [Add Submodel] the only keyword that is position dependent (within the file). This seems ugly. This keyword should contain an explicit reference to the top level model. Response: No change will be made. Reason: The paragraph referenced below states that the [Add Submodel] keyword can be positioned anywhere among the keywords after the initial subparameters of the [Model] keyword. This is consistent with all of the other keywords under [Model] with the exception of the [Model Spec] keyword. Since the [Model Spec] keyword describes subparameters, it is positioned after the list of subparameters. The syntax checker ibischk3 detects only the position of [Model Spec]. It accepts [Add Submodel] in any location under [Model]. For reference the confusing paragraph is stated below: | When special-purpose functional detail is needed, the top-level model can | call one or more submodels. The [Add Submodel] keyword is positioned | after the initial set of required and optional subparameters of the [Model] | keyword and among the keywords under [Model]. | There is no need to explicitly reference the top-level model since [Add Submodel] is a keyword positioned within that specific [Model]. Intel: 3 Editorial Reference: Page 11 Suggested Change: Last sentence of the Usage Rules section of the [Component] description appears to have a typo.. remove the word 'and'. Response: We agree with this suggest change. The word "and" will be deleted. Intel: 4 Editorial Reference: Page 20 Suggested Change: The last sentence in the introductory paragraph of usage rules is redundant and should be removed. Sentence begins "Model names with reserved...". Response: We agree with this suggest change. The redundant sentence will be deleted. Also, the document format for that paragraph which contains shortened lines will be fixed. Note: This text has existed since Version 1.1. Intel: 5 Editorial Reference: Page 23 Suggested Change: When describing the Vinh, Vinl rules and the typ column, clarify if the typ column either does or doesn't override that declared elsewhere. The phrase "would be expected to" isn't clear at all. Response: We agree with this observation. The words "would be expected to" are deleted since the intent is to describe exactly what subparameters override other subparameters. Intel: 6 Editorial Reference: Page 23 Suggested Change: Delete paragraph about reversing Vinh, Vinl to mimic hysteresis. While this my be true, we have explicit parameters that describe this functionality and we should not document or encourage an alternate method. Response: We agree with this suggest change. The paragraph will be deleted since it also describes an interpretation that has not been standardized. Intel: 7 Editorial Reference: Page 24 Suggested Change: the whole discussion on dynamic and static overshoot is confusing. I can't figure out if static or dynamic overshoot implies an absolute maximum rating or device destruction or what. Not sure how to fix, but this does need to be clarified. Response: We agree with this section may not be clear. We plan to add a figure (in response to another letter ballot comment) to clarify this. Intel: 8 Editorial Suggested Change: Change all "S" to "s" when it is used as the abbreviation for the unit of time as in seconds. Capital "S" stands for the unit of conductance, Siemens, and not time. This should be done also where it appears with prefixes, such as "n" for nano, etc. Rationale: In general, we should follow the official standard spelling rules of units and prefixes everywhere. Response: We agree with this suggest change. We intend to use standardized abbreviations throughout the document. We will correct all occurrences. Intel: 9 Editorial Suggested Change: I found two occurrences of "VI" in an ASCII drawing which should be changed to "IV" to be consistent with the spelling in section 9, "Notes on Data Derivation Method", and BIRD58.2. Rationale: These curves are plotted current verses voltage, and the proper order for the symbols "I" and "V" therefore is IV, not VI. Response: We agree with correcting the problem. We will change the occurrences of VI in the diagram to I-V. We will also change all occurrences of "V/I" and "IV" to "I-V" for consistency. Note: The term "V/I" has existed since Version 1.1. However, we need to provide consistent nomenclature throughout the document. ------ Bob asked for discussion, and there were no issues with these responses. Bob proposed amending the response to Intel Comment 7 to specifically refer to BIRD59.1 as part of the resolution: Change: Response: We agree with this section may not be clear. We plan to add a figure (in response to another letter ballot comment) to clarify this. to Response: We agree that this section may not be clear. We plan to add a figure (in response to another letter ballot comment) to clarify this according to changes documented as BIRD59.1 Bob called for a vote on the Intel responses, as changed above. The responses were approved by a unanimous vote. CISCO SYSTEMS COMMENTS AND DRAFT RESPONSES Bob Ross reviewed the letter ballot comments and draft responses from Cisco Systems. They are listed below, as given in the July 23, 1999 Minutes: ------ Cisco Systems: 1 Editorial Reference: Page 24 Suggested Change: Add a hysteresis diagram showing all the sub-parameters. Rationale: Would clarify usage of Vinh+, Vinh-, Vinl+, Vinl-, S_overshoot_high, S_overshoot_low, D_overshoot_high, D_overshoot_low, D_overshoot_time, Pulse_high, Pulse_low, Pulse_time. Response: We agree with this suggest change. We will add an illustration or illustrations to clarify the meaning of the subparameters. Cisco Systems: 2 Editorial Reference: Page 31 Suggested Change: Change from "..of one note per V/I table if .." to ".. of one warning per V/I table if ..", and change from "Note: Line 300, Pulldown .." to "Warning: Line 300 Pulldown ..". Response: We agree with this suggest change. We will make the changes from "note" to "warning" as suggested. Cisco Systems: 3 Editorial Reference: Page 40-41 Suggested Change: Should provide example with 4 V/T tables instead of the two shown. Model developers are providing 2 V/T tables following the conditions illustrated on Page 40 & 41. Since 4 V/T tables have been discussed extensively in the forum for accuracy reasons, please provide example of all four cases: 1) [Rising waveform] with 50 Ohms to vdd 2) [Rising Waveform] with 50 Ohms to gnd 3) [Falling waveform] with 50 Ohms to vdd 4) [Falling Waveform] with 50 Ohms to gnd. Response: No change will be made. Reason: While we agree with the intent of the suggestion, the document intends to illustrate only the syntax or portions thereof. Adding two more tables would be redundant. Complete examples and guidelines are contained in other documents. Cisco Systems: 4 Editorial Reference: Page 69 Suggested Change: Need a diagram clarification of parameters used. Response: We agree with this suggest change. Each of the three examples will have a corresponding diagram. ------ Bob called for a discussion on the responses. (Some of this occurred during the presentation of the responses above.) Bob suggested we modify the response to Comment 1 to refer to BIRD59.1: from Response: We agree with this suggest change. We will add an illustration or illustrations to clarify the meaning of the subparameters. to Response: We agree with this suggest change. We will add an illustrations according to changes documented in BIRD59.1 During the presentation of the responses above, we discussed the Cisco Systems Comment 3 response. Michael Cohen indicated that we had discussed this at the last meeting and heard the suggestion that we add to the response that we are adding a note to the text. The original response above is: Response: No change will be made. Reason: While we agree with the intent of the suggestion, the document intends to illustrate only the syntax or portions thereof. Adding two more tables would be redundant. Complete examples and guidelines are contained in other documents. We opened the discussion as to what kind of note should be added. One suggestion was to state that four waveforms are required. Bob noted that this was not a syntax requirement and there are cases (even with CMOS buffers that four waveforms may not be needed). Matthew Flora suggested listing the exceptions such as for Open* and ECL technologies. Chris Rokusek stated that there could be a reference to the Cookbook. He also favored moving the "Notes on Data Derivation" section to the Cookbook at some future release. Bob indicated that we could also move the details into the related keyword definition sections. The Cookbook is not a finished document, so Bob felt it is inappropriate to make a reference to it. D.C. Sessions proposed a statement that four waveforms may be necessary for accurate models. After more discussion and refining the wording, we agreed to revise the response to the one below: Response: We will comply with the intent of the Suggest Change by adding the following note in the [Rising Waveform], [Falling Waveform] keyword section: | NOTE: In most cases two [Rising Waveform] tables and two | [Falling Waveform] tables will be necessary for accurate | modeling. Reason: While we agree with the intent of the suggestion, the document intends to illustrate only the syntax or portions thereof. Adding two more tables would be redundant. Complete examples and guidelines are contained in other documents. Bob also wanted to modify the response to Comment 4 to reference pending BIRD60: from Response: We agree with this suggest change. Each of the three examples will have a corresponding diagram. to Response: We agree with this suggest change. Each of the three examples will have a corresponding diagram according to changes documented in BIRD60. Bob called for a vote on the Cisco responses, as changed above. The responses as amended were approved by unanimous vote. SIQUAL, INC. LETTER BALLOT COMMENTS AND DRAFT RESPONSES Bob Ross reviewed the letter ballot comments and draft responses from Siqual, Inc. They are listed below and were issued on the IBIS reflector a a few days ago. Therefore they are open for discussion, but not for a vote. ----- SiQual: 1 Editorial Reference: Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES", paragraph 1 Suggested Change: Change From: | 1) The content of the files is case sensitive, except for reserved | words and keywords. File names must be all lower case. To (delete last sentence): | 1) The content of the files is case sensitive, except for reserved | words and keywords. Rationale: The file name restriction is redundant, and should be covered only in paragraph 3, which pertains to file names. Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. SiQual: 2 Editorial Reference: Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES", paragraph 3 Suggested Change: Change From: | 3) File names used in the IBIS file must only have lower case characters to | enhance UNIX compatibility. File names should have a basename of no | more than twenty characters followed by a period, followed by a file | name extension of no more than three characters. File names must not | contain characters that are illegal in DOS. To: (shorten first sentence, replace third sentence) | 3) File names used in the IBIS file must only have lower case characters. | File names should have a basename of no more than twenty characters | followed by a period ('.') , followed by a file name extension of no | more than three characters. The file name and extension must use | characters from the set (space, ' ', 0x20 is not included): | | A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ ^ $ ~ ! # % & - { } ) ( @ ' ` | | The file name and extension are recommended to be lower case on | systems that support such names. Rationale: 1) References to specific software or products is not precise. 2) The phrase "to enhance UNIX compatibility" is wrong. 3) The phrase "illegal in DOS" is not defined. 4) The "golden parser" code allows the following characters in file names The allowed character set is currently defined by the "golden parser" as (the space character, ' ', 0x20 is not included): A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ ^ $ ~ ! # % & - { } ) ( @ ' ` . Note: the illegal characters are therefore: SP(0x20) " * + , / : ; < = > ? [ \ ] | DEL(0x7F) The period '.' should not be allowed, as it is specified as the file name/extension delimiter. 5) From "hdr.c" (part of the "golden parser", no version info in file) /* DOS restrictions */ if (!isalpha(*pc) && !isdigit(*pc) && (*pc != '_') && (*pc != '^') && (*pc != '$') && (*pc != '~') && (*pc != '!') && (*pc != '#') && (*pc != '%') && (*pc != '&') && (*pc != '-') && (*pc != '{') && (*pc != '}') && (*pc != ')') && (*pc != '(') && (*pc != '@') && (*pc != '\'') && (*pc != '`') && (*pc != '.')) { ERRLOG_LineError( "File_name '%s' contains a character '%c' that is illegal for DOS.", pHdr->sFile_name, *pc); } Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. SiQual: 3 Editorial Reference: Section 3, Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES", paragraph 6 Suggested Change: Change From: | 6) Keywords must be enclosed in square brackets, [], and must start in | column 1 of the line. To: (add additional sentences) | 6) Keywords must be enclosed in square brackets, [], and must start in | column 1 of the line. No space or tab is allowed after the opening | bracket '[' or before the closing bracket ']'. If used, only one | space (' ') or underscore ('_') character separates the parts of a | multi-word keyword. Rationale: This is not specified by the standard, but is enforced by the "golden parser." If required, this behavior should be spelled out in the standard. Response: We agree with this Suggested Change, but with the following additional clarifications: Change "after" to "immediately after" and "before" to "immediately before". SiQual: 4 Editorial Reference: Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES", paragraph 14 Suggested Change: Change From: | 14) Only ASCII characters, as defined in ANSI Standard X3.4-1986, may be | used in an IBIS file. The use of characters with codes greater than | hexadecimal 07F is not allowed. Also, ASCII control characters | (those numerically less than hexadecimal 20) are not allowed, except | for tabs or in a line termination sequence. As mentioned in item 10 | above, the use of tab characters is discouraged. To: (change second sentence) | . . . The use of characters with codes greater than | hexadecimal 07E is not allowed. . . . Rationale: The ASCII character DEL (0x7F) is not consistently implemented across systems. It is often non-printable, and when printed, is not the same on different systems. Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. SiQual: 5 Editorial Reference: Section 4, "FILE HEADER INFORMATION", Keyword: [File Name] Suggested Change: Change From: | Usage Rules: The file name must not be longer than 24 characters (including | the extension). The file name must not use characters that | are illegal in DOS. In addition, the file name must be all | lower case, and use the extension ".ibs". The file name must | be the actual name of the file. To: (replace first two sentences, change third sentence) | Usage Rules: The file name must conform to the rules in paragraph 3 of | Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES." In | addition, the file name must use the extension ".ibs", | ".pkg", or ".ebd". The file name must be the actual | name of the file. Rationale: 1) File naming rules must be consistent and defined only in one place. Specifically, Section 3, "GENERAL SYNTAX RULES AND GUIDELINES" para 1: defines case of file names as all lower (this should move to para 3) para 3: defines filename length and format as twenty character name + period + three character extension 2) To be consistent with Section 7, "PACKAGE MODELING" and section 8, "ELECTRICAL BOARD DESCRIPTION", the ".pkg" and ".ebd" must be allowed. Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. SiQual: 6 Editorial Reference: Section 4, "FILE HEADER INFORMATION", Keyword: [Comment Char] Suggested Change: Change From: | Usage Rules: The new comment character to be defined must be followed by | the underscore character and the letters "char". For example: | "|_char" redundantly redefines the comment character to be | the pipe character. The new comment character is in effect | only following the [Comment Char] keyword. The following | characters MAY NOT be used: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P | Q R S T U V W X Y Z a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u | v w x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [ ] . _ / = + - To: (change last sentence) | . . . The following | characters MAY be used: | | ! " # $ % & ' * , : ; < > ? @ ^ ` | ~ Rationale: 1) For clarity, definition of a limited set of characters should be terms of those allowed, not those disallowed. 2) Based on the current wording and paragraph 14 of section three, the allowed [Comment Char] list is (ASCII hex shown first): | 20 SP | 21 ! | 22 " | 23 # | 24 $ | 25 % | 26 & | 27 ' | | 28 ( | 29 ) | 2A * | | 2C , | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3A : | 3B ; | 3C < | | 3E > | 3F ? | | 40 @ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5C \ | | 5E ^ | | | 60 ` | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7B { | 7C | | 7D } | 7E ~ | 7F DEL| Of this list: 0x20 'SP' - is wrong 0x7F 'DEL' - is inconsistently implemented across systems 0x5C '\' - is commonly used as an escape meta-character 0x28 '(', 0x29 ')' - paired delimiters should be reserved for future 0x7B '(', 0x7D ')' use by the standard 3) The "golden parser" program 'ibischk3' implements per the standard: From "parse.c" (part of the "golden parser", no version info in file) /* list of chars that cannot be the comment char */ static char gpcBadCommChars[] = "0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[]._/=+-"; Response: We agree that the permitted comment characters should be listed as suggested. However, since the `\', `(', `)', `{', and `}' characters are already permitted by the standard and by the ibischk3 parser code, we are including them in the list. We may consider reducing the number of permitted comment characters in IBIS Version 4.0. The amended list is | ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * , : ; < > ? @ \ ^ ` { | } ~ SiQual: 7 Editorial Reference: Section 5, "COMPONENT DESCRIPTION"; [Component] keyword, Sub-Param Usage Rules, paragraph 3 Suggested Change: Change From: | . . . The default location is at the 'Pin'. | However, the 'Die' location is also available for either or | and both subparameters. To (shorten existing second sentence, then insert new second sentence): | . . . Allowed values for either sub-parameter | are 'Die' or 'Pin'. The default location is at the 'Pin'. Rationale: Clarification of wording. Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. SiQual: 8 Editorial Reference: Section 6a, "ADD SUBMODEL DESCRIPTION"; sub-section "SUBMODEL:", paragraph 4 Suggested Change: Change From: < Move paragraph 4 and list of keywords to the [Submodel] keyword description > | The following set of keywords that are defined under the [Model] keyword are | support by the [Submodel] keyword: | | [Pulldown] | [Pullup] | [GND Clamp] | [POWER Clamp] | [Ramp] | [Rising Waveform] | [Falling Waveform] To (correct spelling of "supported" in first sentence, add new paragraph): | The only required subparameter in [Submodel] is Submodel_type to define the | list of submodel types. The other subparameters under [Model] are not | permitted under the [Submodel] keyword. | | The following set of keywords that are defined under the [Model] keyword are | supported by the [Submodel] keyword: | | [Pulldown] | [Pullup] | [GND Clamp] | [POWER Clamp] | [Ramp] | [Rising Waveform] | [Falling Waveform] | At least one of the [Pulldown], [Pullup], [GND Clamp], [POWER Clamp] is < | required. If the [Submodel] describes a driver, the [Ramp] keyword is < | required. < Rationale: The initial text is redundant, since the proper location is in the [Submodel] keyword description. The additional paragraph stipulates that some reason must exist for a [Submodel] definition. Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. SiQual: 9 Editorial Reference: Section 6a, "ADD SUBMODEL DESCRIPTION"; keyword [Submodel]; Sub-Param Usage Rules, paragraph _ Suggested Change: Change From: | . . . The | submodel name must match the one that is listed under the | [Add Submodel] To (in second sentence, change "under the" to "under a"): | . . . The | submodel name must match the one that is listed under a | [Add Submodel] keyword . . . Rationale: The wording is not correct. Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. ----- Bob asked for discussion. (Some of this discussion occurred during the review of all of the comments.) On Siqual Comment 2, Matthew Flora and Stephen Peters stated that the reason for the change is lost. Matthew Flora and Stephen Peters stated that the reason for the change is lost regarding compatibility with DOS and UNIX systems. After some discussion, Stephen proposed and initial clause that provide the reason for using lower case characters. In the Suggested Change, uppercase characters are also listed (as they exit in the ibischk3 code. The parser accepts them for file names (as they would exist in DOS systems, but finds they illegal elsewhere if they are used a a [File Name] argument. Michael Cohen mentioned this can occur in other systems. as well. We agreed to remove the uppercase characters since the intent is to specify what is allowed as a transportable, legal [File Name] argument, not how the file is actually stored. Bob mentioned that since we are not voting on this, the comment provider has an opportunity to review the change. With these two changes, the response is changed: from Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. to Response: We will make a similar Suggested Change, but with some changes. An introductory phrase is added to give in a more general sense the reason for the choice of characters. Also the uppercase set of characters are removed. | 3) To facilitate portability between operating systems, file names used in | the IBIS file must only have lower case characters. File names should | have a basename of no more than twenty characters followed by a period | ('.') , followed by a file name extension of no more than three | characters. The file name and extension must use characters from the | set (space, ' ', 0x20 is not included): | | a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ ^ $ ~ ! # % & - { } ) ( @ ' ` | | The file name and extension are recommended to be lower case on | systems that support such names. Bob stated the he initially propose agreeing with the Suggested Change for Comment 8. However, he is now proposing a revised response after looking at the Suggested Change closer. He now proposes changing the response: from Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. to Response: We agree with some of the Suggested Changes and will make a related editorial correction. We do not plan to move the set of keywords, as suggested since it would destroy the context of some other paragraphs. We did not add the last paragraph, as suggested. Instead we add a sentence in the last paragraph to refer to other sections for specific details on what is required. The proposed revision follows from the suggestions above until the end of the section are as follows (|* lines indicate changes or additions): | The only required subparameter in [Submodel] is Submodel_type to define the |*list of submodel types. No subparameters under [Model] are permitted under |*the [Submodel] keyword. | | The following set of keywords that are defined under the [Model] keyword are |*supported by the [Submodel] keyword: | | [Pulldown] | [Pullup] | [GND Clamp] | [POWER Clamp] | [Ramp] | [Rising Waveform] | [Falling Waveform] | | The [Voltage Range], [Pullup Reference], [Pulldown Reference], [GND Clamp | Reference], and [POWER Clamp Reference] keywords are not permitted. The | voltage settings are inherited from the top-level model. | | These additional keywords are used only for the [Submodel] are documented | in this section: | | [Submodel Spec] | [GND Pulse Table] | [POWER Pulse Table] | | The application of these keywords depends upon the Submodel_type entries | listed below: | | Dynamic_clamp | Bus_hold | | Permitted keywords that are not defined for any of these submodel types are |*ignored. The rules for what set of keywords are required are found under |*the Dynamic Clamp and Bus Hold headings of this section. Reason: The second sentence in the first paragraph made a reference to common subparameters. This no longer exists and the wording is corrected. The top-level description in the SUBMODEL: section gives details of other keywords as well, and removing this "redundant" section would destroy to context of the descriptions. In the [Submodel] keyword description, the list of permitted keyword are given in the "Other Notes:" section. However the rules for what is required depend on the Submodel_type selection and are discussed later. Bob also proposed a minor editorial revision concerning Comment 9 which changed the response: from Response: We agree with this Suggested Change. to Response: We agree with this Suggested Change with the following modifications or additions: Change "a" to "an" and also add "a" to similar text for the [Model] keyword on page 20. As previously stated, Bob plans to reopen the discussion of these responses for consideration and vote at the next meeting. However, he will include the revised responses in the uploaded unofficial IBIS Version 3.2 documents. OTHER COMMENTS ON IBIS VERSION 3.2 Bob noticed that the reference to 10 BIRDs on page 6 concerning the ver3_2.ibs changes did not define BIRD. Michael Cohen corrected Bob by indicating that BIRD was define regarding the ver3_0.ibs changes. Bob withdrew the statement. ([Later, made other changes in the statement to bring it up to date.] Bob noted other discussion with Ian Dodd concerning some EBD details. Ian had raised concern that the eight character limit may be a problem with a board with multiple connectors. He also had asked how it was handled when an EBD plugs into a ground plane. Also he had raised the question whether loops are supported. We briefly mentioned each of these, but did not have time for extended discussion. Bob also noted some discussions based on a question from Matthew Flora concerning whether the [Driver Schedule] can reference a [Model Selector] name. The authors did not intend for this to be allowed, but it was not clear in the document. Bob asked if any of these issues would prevent delaying the IBIS Version 3.2 formal ratification, and the response by Ian and Matthew was no. Bob noted that we can still discuss these at the next meeting and would be open to minor editorial changes at that time. Time ran out before the remaining items were discussed. ACCURACY SPECIFICATION DISCUSSION Not discussed. Bob indicated earlier that this would be deferred until next meeting if we ran out of time. BUG34 - NO ERROR REPORTED FOR MISSING V/I TABLE IN OUTPUT BUFFERS Not discussed. Matthew Flora's AR is still open. AR - Matthew Flora issue a revised BUG34 to document the conditions where Warning messages are issued. BUG36 - RESERVE WORDS ERROR FOR PIN MAPPING AND SERIES PIN MAPPING Not discussed. BUG37 - PIN MAPPING FOR UNIQUE GND AND POWER PIN GENERATES ERROR Not discussed. INPUT SPECIFICATION Not discussed. CONNECTOR PROPOSAL STATUS Not discussed. NUMBER OF POINTS IN VT TABLE Not discussed. SIGNAL INTEGRITY REFLECTOR RECENT DISCUSSIONS - IBIS Version 3.2 Support - I/O Edge Rates - Odd/Even Mode - Simplifying Spice Models Not discussed. NEXT MEETING: The next teleconference meeting will be on Friday, August 20, 1999 from 8:00 AM to 10:00 AM. Votes on BIRD59.1 and BIRD60 and responses to the Siqual letter ballot comments are scheduled. Also, a vote on the release of the revised IBIS Version 3.2 document is scheduled. ============================================================================== NOTES IBIS CHAIR: Bob Ross (503) 685-0732, Fax (503) 685-4897 bob_ross@mentorg.com Modeling Engineer, Mentor Graphics 8005 S.W. Boeckman Road, Wilsonville, OR 97070 VICE CHAIR: Stephen Peters (503) 264-4108, Fax: (503) 264-4515 sjpeters@ichips.intel.com Senior Hardware Engineer, Intel Corporation M/S JF1-56 2111 NE 25th Ave. Hillsboro, OR 97124-5961 SECRETARY: Guy de Burgh (805) 988-8250, Fax: (805) 988-8259 gdeburgh@viewlogic.com Senior Manager, Viewlogic Systems 1369 Del Norte Rd. Camarillo, CA 93010-8437 LIBRARIAN: Jon Powell (805) 988-8250, Fax: (805) 988-8259 jonp@qdt.com Senior Scientist, Viewlogic Systems 1385 Del Norte Rd. Camarillo, CA 93010 WEBMASTER: Syed Huq (408) 525-3399, Fax: (408) 526-5504 shuq@cisco.com Signal Integrity Engineer, Cisco Systems 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134-1706 POSTMASTER: Matthew Flora (425) 869-2320, Fax: (425) 881-1008 mbflora@hyperlynx.com Senior Engineer, HyperLynx, Inc. 17641 NE 67th Court Redmond, WA 98052 This meeting was conducted in accordance with the EIA Legal Guides and EIA Manual of Organization and Procedure. The following e-mail addresses are used: ibis-request@eda.org To join, change, or drop from either the IBIS Open Forum Reflector (ibis@eda.org), the IBIS Users' Group Reflector (ibis-users@eda.org) or both. State your request. ibis-info@eda.org To obtain general information about IBIS, to ask specific questions for individual response, and to inquire about joining the EIA-IBIS Open Forum as a full Member. ibis@eda.org To send a message to the general IBIS Open Forum Reflector. This is used mostly for IBIS Standardization business and future IBIS technical enhancements. Job posting information is not permitted. ibis-users@eda.org To send a message to the IBIS Users' Group Reflector. This is used mostly for IBIS clarification, current modeling issues, and general user concerns. Job posting information is not permitted. ibischk-bug@eda.org To report ibischk2/3 parser bugs. The Bug Report Form Resides on eda.org in /pub/ibis/bugs/ibischk/bugform.txt along with reported bugs. To report s2ibis, s2ibis2 and s2iplt bugs, use the Bug Report Forms which reside under eda.org in /pub/ibis/bugs/s2ibis/bugs2i.txt, /pub/ibis/bugs/s2ibis2/bugs2i2.txt, & /pub/ibis/bugs/s2iplt/bugsplt.txt respectively. Information on IBIS technical contents, IBIS participants, and actual IBIS models are available on the IBIS Home page found by selecting the Electronic Information Group under: http://www.eia.org Check the pub/ibis directory on eda.org for more information on previous discussions and results. You can get on via FTP anonymous. ==============================================================================