This message is from the T13 list server.

Thanks guys for those answers, I simply hope if you define ATAPI-8 with requirement of 
MMC4 version
2 support, I really hope there will be an additionnal command defined by T13 forum 
that gives the
version.sub-version.release of this MMC "standard".
If you have some time to inquiry to people making CD/DVD burning software you'll find 
the list of
ALL possible drives, each one having some specific call (acceptable) and specific way 
to answer to
"standard" MMC (quite boring). Could this be avoided for serial ATAPI while stepping 
with a possible
clean standard ?

One other point is : as Hale said "SATA is not compatible with PATA".
Could it be that serial ATAPI could be more compatible with parrallel ATAPI  (plus the 
requirements
for better filtering the multimedia calls) ?

Thanks for reading
Gilles Molli�
STMicroelectronics



----- Original Message ----- 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 20:41
Subject: Re: [t13] ATA/ATAPI-8 suggestions list (resend)


This message is from the T13 list server.


> >This message is from the T13 list server.
> >Could ATA/ATAPI-8 force some better identification of
> >supported features with a "labelled"
> >multimedia command set : ATAPI-8 ?
>
> Doesn't the SCSI MMC-x define all this now?
>
> But this once again brings up the question: Is an ATAPI device really
> a SCSI device or is ATAPI just something that looks like SCSI? In my
> opinion ATAPI is SCSI but other people seem to still hang on to the
> idea that is it something different - just look at all the work that
> continues to go into SFF-8090 and the failure of the SFF-8070 people
> to merge into SCSI SBC.

That question is answered.

T10 has now accepted into itself the paradox of contradiction.  For
example, T10 SPC offers a definition of op x12 Inquiry, and T10 MMC
offers a competing definition.

So we no longer need to talk about SFF and T10 offering two standards
that differ only enough to be binary incompatible.  Now T10 itself does
that.

Beyond the many explicit contradictions, some implicit contradictions
may remain.  For example, I haven't yet seen anyone but me publish the
fact that most ATAPI hosts overwrite unallocated memory if asked to pass
thru such popular, and by-t10-legitimate, cdb/ data length combinations
as:

-i x05 -y "12 00 00 00 05 00" // Inquiry up thru offset 4 Addi. Length

-i x12 -y "03 00 00 00 12 00" // Default Win XP/2K auto sense

Pat LaVarre




Reply via email to