Subject: EIA IBIS Open Forum Meeting Minutes 8/6/99

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 14:33:23 -0700

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
            [email-masked]
            Modeling Engineer, Mentor Graphics
            8005 S.W. Boeckman Road, Wilsonville, OR 97070

VICE CHAIR: Stephen Peters (503) 264-4108, Fax: (503) 264-4515
            [email-masked]
            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
            [email-masked]
            Senior Manager, Viewlogic Systems
            1369 Del Norte Rd.
            Camarillo, CA 93010-8437

LIBRARIAN:  Jon Powell (805) 988-8250, Fax: (805) 988-8259
            [email-masked]
            Senior Scientist, Viewlogic Systems
            1385 Del Norte Rd.
            Camarillo, CA 93010

WEBMASTER:  Syed Huq (408) 525-3399, Fax: (408) 526-5504
            [email-masked]
            Signal Integrity Engineer, Cisco Systems
            170 West Tasman Drive
            San Jose, CA 95134-1706

POSTMASTER: Matthew Flora (425) 869-2320, Fax: (425) 881-1008
            [email-masked]
            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:

  [email-masked]
      To join, change, or drop from either the IBIS Open Forum Reflector
      ([email-masked]), the IBIS Users' Group Reflector ([email-masked])
      or both.  State your request.

  [email-masked]
      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.

  [email-masked]
      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.

  [email-masked]
      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.

  [email-masked]
      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.
==============================================================================