RE: IBIS Meeting 12/17/99

I was supposed to write this a long time ago, but things are crazy
around here lately so I couldn't. Not that I have more time now,
but this is for the cause.

I noticed that most keywords have a description in the usage rules for
where they can appear in a model. However, a few do not mention anything.
It would be nice to consistently explain this for every single keyword.
The ones I couldn't find this description for are:
  [Begin/end_Cn_Model_List],
  [Begin/end_Cn_Model],
  [Row],
  [Diagonal_matrix],
  [Banded_matrix],
  [Sparce_matrix],
  [Bandwidth]

A keyword tree, or map would be a good aid in determining the hierarchical
ordering and dependencies of the keywords.

Also, since the words are usually capitalized in these keywords, the word
"matrix" should be also spelled with a capitol "M". The square brackets
"[" and "]" are missing from some of these keywords also.

In the units section it only goes from Tera to fempto. Since coupling
can be very small, we should extend this (at least) on the low side ("a" for
anno 1e-18, etc).

I wonder about the rules of required matrixes (L, C, and R). I understand
the
cases listed in the spec, but I wonder about unexpected usage. For example,
I was looking into using this spec for on-die interconnect descriptions. If
I
succeeded with that, I may need to provide an RC type interconnect, not LC.
According to the requirements of this spec this would not be possible.

Other than that, I think it is a very good spec. Thanks for all the work
that went into it.

Arpad
=========================================================================

-----Original Message-----
From: apanella@molex.com [mailto:apanella@molex.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 1999 5:44 AM
To: Bob Ross; ibis@eda.org
Subject: RE: IBIS Meeting 12/17/99

Bob / Kellee,

I have a prior meeting commitment starting at 10:00 on Dec. 17

Therefore, I unfortunately will not be able to attend the meeting...
Kellee,
would you be able to attend??

However, I have not seen ANY comments (zero, nada, zilch, nothing, etc.)
on
the reflector with regards to the IBIS connector specification. So, is
there
really anything to talk about? From the lack of response.. either everyone
thinks it's great... or everyone hasn't read it... Maybe... if we can use
the
meeting to URGENTLY request more (some?) feedback!!

Either way... it would be nice to get feedback and question with regards to
the
specification before we get into an open phone discussion, such that there
would
be time to prepare concise answers or create a change to the
specification...

Best Regards,
_gus

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Ross <bob_ross@mentorg.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 1:45 PM
> To: ibis@eda.org
> Subject: IBIS Meeting 12/17/99
>
>
>
> IBIS Open Forum Meeting Agenda
> for 12/17/99
>
> Bridge Number Reservation # Passcode
> (916) 356-9200 2-368942 8917482
>
 <SNIP>
Received on Thu Dec 16 15:51:46 1999