This message is from the T13 list server.

Andre, SATA is not SAS. SATA is a serial implementation of ATA. It is
targeted at the same applications and costs as PATA. It is SW compatible
with PATA. The suggestion to make it Vol 3 seems quite logical to me.

Edwin J. Pole II
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

$ -----Original Message-----
$ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Andre
$ Hedrick
$ Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:58 PM
$ To: T13 (E-mail)
$ Subject: RE: [t13] FW: Transfer of SATA 1.0 spec to T13
$
$
$
$ This message is from the T13 list server.
$
$
$
$ <rant>
$ Why not just merge T13 and T10 back togather into the X3 group as the
$ purpose of SAS is to promote the existance of a dead standard on the
$ physical layer.
$
$ The reality is SAS is only around to promote the extra bloated costs
$ associated w/ SCSI and make claims T10 hardware is superior to T13's.
$
$ Turning ATA in to the "ends justify the means" transport is not what is
$ desired.  Moving from a state-machine to a fuzzy-bus-state, only makes
$ things a mess.
$
$ Spliting volumes so that one part of the committee is clueless to what the
$ other part is doing is wrong and needs to go back to T10, regardless.
$ </rant>
$
$ Ah, that feels better.
$
$
$
$ Andre Hedrick
$ LAD Storage Consulting Group
$
$ On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote:
$
$ > This message is from the T13 list server.
$ >
$ >
$ > Rather than keep the ATA-7 volume 1/2 split that exists today (adding
$ > volume 3 for SATA?), would it make sense to split it into three
$ > standards:
$ >
$ > 1. ATA architecture and command set (what Volume 1 has today)
$ > 2. Parallel ATA transport protocol (what Volume 2 has today)
$ > 3. Serial ATA transport protocol (which will be revised many times in
$ > the future)
$ >
$ > ATA/ATAPI-7 would be like SCSI-3, the last global ATA/ATAPI-n number.
$ >
$ > Rather than work on ATA/ATAPI-8 next and upgrade the commands and
$ > transport protocols at the same time (even if they don't all need
$ > changes), ATA Commands - 2, 3, etc. work could progress independently
$ > from Serial ATA - 2, 3, etc. work.  Parallel ATA - 1 might be the last
$ > version of that standard.
$ >
$ >
$ >
$ > As discussed before, I'd also urge you to consider these renamings as
$ > Serial ATA is added:
$ >     device -> target
$ >     host -> initiator
$ >     Parallel ATA/volume 2 uses "Parallel ATA initiator/target"
$ >     Serial ATA/volume 3 uses "Serial ATA initiator/target"
$ >     Command set/volume 1 uses "ATA initiator/target"
$ >
$ > This is patterned after the terminology used by the SCSI standards
$ > and would help ATAPI and SAS (which both use ATA and SCSI together).
$ >
$ > --
$ > Rob Elliott, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
$ > Hewlett-Packard Industry Standard Server Storage Advanced Technology
$ > https://ecardfile.com/id/RobElliott
$ >
$ >
$ >
$ >
$ > > -----Original Message-----
$ > > From: Mclean, Pete [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
$ > > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 1:23 PM
$ > > To: T13 (E-mail)
$ > > Subject: [t13] FW: Transfer of SATA 1.0 spec to T13
$ > >
$ > >
$ > > This message is from the T13 list server.
$ > >
$ > >
$ > >
$ > >
$ > > -----Original Message-----
$ > > From: Ziller, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
$ > > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:54 PM
$ > > To: 'Mclean, Pete'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
$ > > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
$ > > Subject: Transfer of SATA 1.0 spec to T13
$ > >
$ > >
$ > > Dear Technical Committee T13,
$ > >
$ > > The Serial ATA Steering Committee is very interested in
$ > > transferring the
$ > > Serial ATA 1.0 specification over to the T13 Committee as
$ > > soon as possible
$ > > to be incorporated into the ATA/ATAPI Rev 7 release.  The
$ > > Steering Committee
$ > > has already voted and unanimously approved this transfer.  We
$ > > can start
$ > > having the Promoter companies approve and execute the
$ > > copyright release
$ > > forms as soon as we hear that the T13 Committee has voted to
$ > > accept the
$ > > Serial ATA 1.0 specification.  If the T13 Committee votes to
$ > > accept the spec
$ > > in December, then we expect to be able to transfer the spec
$ > > by January 2003.
$ > > Also, we are in the process of incorporating the existing
$ > > errata into the
$ > > specification, and expect that will be completed within the
$ > > same timeframe.
$ > > Please let us know what your critical deadlines are, and if
$ > > the above meets
$ > > your needs.
$ > >
$ > > Regards,
$ > >
$ > > Jason Ziller
$ > > Serial ATA Working Group chairman
$ > >
$ > >
$ >
$

Reply via email to