Sorry I missed the last meeting.
With regards to this issue of 1212 vs 1394 I have a few comments.
I think that the 1394PWG was well represented at the MSC meeting. Greg,
Don and I were there for the discussion.
For the past few 1394PWC/PWG-C meetings we have focused on the 1212
standard as the method to implement the Device and Function Discovery. A
number of times the question was raised as to whether this is a 1212 or
1394 issue. This subject was discussed at length at the MSC meeting. The
committee felt that this was best placed under 1212 for the following reasons:
1- This methodology can be applied to interfaces other than 1394
2- Since the 1212 spec is open for reaffirmation this gives us more
flexibility in defining the discovery mechanism.
3- We don't have the overhead of creating a new IEEE committee for this.
This means we could go to ballot before the end of the year.
There is a push to have this done by December. Impossible as a new
IEEE committee.
4- There are just a few additional minor 1212 issues. So there will be very
little impact on what we are doing.
5- As the only 1212 "task group", we will meet just as we are now. No
change in our procedure.
6- This doesn't effect the printing protocol part of our discussions.
For these reasons it seems to me that this is a good way to proceed. If
two months from now we find that we need a separate path then that is still
available.
Thanks,
Larry
and At 03:34 PM 7/17/97 -0700, Oktay, Ozay wrote:
>I agree with Nakamura-san..
>
>The disadvantages of involving another group (ie 1212) will definitely
>outweigh the advantages. The Functional Discovery issue should be dealt
>with under 1394..
>
>Best Regards
>Ozay Oktay
>
>Canon Information Systems
>ozay_oktay@cissc.canon.com
>
>>----------
>>From: Atsushi_Nakamura[SMTP:atsnaka@cbs.canon.co.jp]
>>Sent: Thursday, July 17, 1997 1:46 AM
>>To: p1394@pwg.org
>>Subject: Re: P1394> RE:Results of IEEE MSC Meeting on 7/14
>>
>>Greg,
>>
>>Is my understanding right that IF in the course of disscusion,
>>it turns out that the contents of Function discovery is
>>more suitable for the 1394 spec and not 1212,
>>the target of our proposal may change ?
>>
>>I believe that we already have general concensus on what
>>information (not yet how....) should be put in the Function
>>discovery scheme.(In Japan)
>>
>>P.S.
>>Many PWG-C members would like to know how this Function discovery
>>turned out to be a 1212 issue, not a 1394 issue.
>>
>>
>>At 19:19 97/07/16 PDT, gregory_leclair wrote:
>>>
>>> Ats Nakamura wrote:
>>> ==================
>>> Since the MSC has agreed to take the function discovery
>>> issue up at the IEEE1212 revision working group,
>>> does that mean;
>>>
>>> 1) The MSC sees the function discovery issue as a
>>> IEEE1212 problem, not only a IEEE1394 issue?
>>> (PCI....etc?)
>>>
>>> 2) The MSC sees the origional intent of the
>>> IEEE1212's definition of the unit directory
>>> IS protocol discovery after all, not function discovery.
>>>
>>>
>>> GL>The intent was that some information may fit into 1212.
>>>
>>> GL>If it does, it should be proposed within the context of the 1212 spec.
>>> GL>Since 1212 is up for reaffirmation, this is the time to make requests
>>known.
>>>
>>> GL>We need to identify what information, if any, can/should be put into
>>>1212
>>
>>> GL>space that will solve the function discovery problem.
>>>
>>
>>-----------------------------------------
>>Atsushi Nakamura
>>-----------------------------------------
>>BJ Printing Technology
>>Develpoment 22,
>>Canon Inc.
>>tel:+81-3-5482-8396
>>fax:+81-3-3756-6052
>>email-1:Atsushi_Nakamura@cbj.canon.co.jp
>>email-2:atsnaka@cbs.canon.co.jp
>>-----------------------------------------
>>
>
*****************************************************************************
Larry A. Stein Phone: (619)292-2740
Warp Nine Engineering Fax: (619)292-8020
Web: http://www.fapo.com
*****************************************************************************