I'm not sure what kind of designs you do, but my PCBs are nearly useless
without firmware source, programmable logic source, etc.

I have no problems giving Protel my PCBs when necessary because of all the
other information REQUIRED to make anything useful. The board is basically
raw material.

Tony



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 1:49 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: [PEDA] Removing IP from PCB (Ex: Protel's Good/Bad points ...)
>
>
> On 04:29 PM 19/11/2001 +0000, Jason Morgan said:
> >The files in question were returned to Protel under NDA, they
> confirmed the
> >problems as reported and indicated that at present there was no fix.
> >
> >Sorry, but I can't transmit designs to the public, at least without NDA,
> >thanks for the offer anyway.
>
>
> What I have done with this sort of confidential data (even when
> sending the
> file to Protel) is to do a global search and destroy on all PCB parts and
> change their values to 10k  (You see a "10k" 256-ball BGA does
> not contain
> a lot if IP).  I then clear the netlist.
>
> If the board is incomplete, and the netlist from the sch is
> required, then
> it is a little more complex, but still do-able.
> I create some dummy schematics and PCB by copying the correct ones,
> immediately synchronise to make the following processes simpler.  I then,
> globally remove every netlabel of all sheets, rename all the
> power supplies
> to meaningless names and change all the component designators to R? or
> A?  or something meaningless. Re-annotate.  Then change all the
> part types
> to 10k or some other silly value (including all ICs, caps, R's,
> connectors
> etc) and synch to the PCB. The resulting netlist and
> refdesignators convey
> almost no useful info - just point-to-point connectivity.  All
> identifying
> text on the PCB is then removed, and all mech layers removed - apart from
> maybe the outline and the keepout.  I then try to remove as many
> rules and
> classes as possible to reduce the chance of there being some useful IP
> embodied in these.  However, it is likely that mucking about with
> the rules
> is very likely to change the suspect behavior, so this has to be
> done with
> some care.
>
> I may also rejig the mech outline to mask the target application a
> little.  Possibly remove a few mech holes as well.
>
> Then confirm the problem still exists.
>
> I then only send it to people who I think I can trust.  Not to the public
> in general.
>
> So Jason, if you would like others to try to see if you have hit
> a limit on
> the capacity of Protel, this may be one option.  I would also be prepared
> to look at it.  So I think you have three long-term members of this forum
> (at least) who are prepared to see what your file does to their
> machine.  I
> would be very interested in the results of such a test. (I run
> Win2K, SP2,
> 256MB, PIII-450).
>
> I for one do not discount the troubles that Jason has reported over some
> time on this forum.  However as others have said, quite a few of us see
> very very few Protel crashes these days, and there must be significant
> differences in the hardware we run.
>
> Ian Wilson
>

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to