[ibis-macro] Re: yesterday's IBIS-ATM presentation
- From: "Walter Katz" <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <kwillis@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'IBIS-ATM'" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:08:22 -0400
Ken,
I have submitted two BIRDs for consideration by this group for a
recommendation to the Open Forum. If you want to put limitations on our
proposed flows, please submit them as written amendment to what I have
submitted.
Walter
Walter Katz
303.449-2308
Mobile 720.333-1107
wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx
www.sisoft.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Ken Willis
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 11:58 AM
To: Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx; 'IBIS-ATM'
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: yesterday's IBIS-ATM presentation
Hi Arpad,
The stated goal a while back was to get a clarification BIRD in place,
without significant functional changes. This "sticky" combination will take
some kind of significant functional change. And that is fine, but I would
prefer to see it in its own follow-on BIRD.
I think the 8 well-defined flows cover many Serdes applications, and it
would be useful to get those into the spec right away.
Thanks,
Ken Willis
Sigrity, Inc.
860-871-7070
kwillis@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:kwillis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
_____
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muranyi, Arpad
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 10:27 AM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: yesterday's IBIS-ATM presentation
Ken,
Te problem I see with separating out the sticky combination into
its own BIRD is that the other BIRD that deals with the rest of
the combinations will have to make provisions for avoiding or
forbidding that sticky combination. I is usually hard to remove
something that was put into the spec, and I am afraid that this
division of BIRD-s would just further complicate matters.
Do you really think that addressing the sticky combination would
take that much discussion time after we have gone this far in our
understanding of it?
Thanks,
Arpad
==================================================================
_____
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Willis
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:00 AM
To: 'IBIS-ATM'
Subject: [ibis-macro] yesterday's IBIS-ATM presentation
Hello IBIS-ATM members,
Todd gave a good presentation yesterday, and things have simplified
considerably. For the 9 flows that were presented yesterday, 8 of them are
well-defined and agreed upon. I propose that we:
- immediately push forward with a BIRD that covers those 8 flows,
and get that in place
- move the "sticky" 9th combination (tx_GetWave >
rx_modified_ImpulseResponse) to its own separate BIRD
Sigrity is ready to vote along these lines at our next meeting. This let's
us take advantage of the good work that has been done and quickly get this
"clarification BIRD" in place for the majority of AMI combinations.
For the remaining "sticky" combination, there are 3 different potential
solutions that have been identified so far. It will take some more
discussion to finalize, and I don't see value in delaying the other 8 any
longer. Focusing on that one in its own BIRD should expedite its resolution
as well.
Thanks,
Ken Willis
Sigrity, Inc.
860-871-7070
kwillis@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:kwillis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Other related posts:
