[ibis-macro] Re: Mea Culpa, my critique of the Crosstalk BIRD last week was incorrect.

  • From: "Muranyi, Arpad" <Arpad_Muranyi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "IBIS-ATM" <ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 07:38:53 -0800

Walter,

 

Is the 2nd page "left intentionally blank" in the PDF you

sent in the attachment?  If so, would you mind removing it

and send it to us again so we could post a single page

document?  Did you want this example in the BIRD also (and

ultimately in the spec)?  Someone suggested in the previous

meetings that examples would be good, but I don't remember

for which BIRD it was suggested.

 

Thanks,

 

Arpad

============================================================

 

From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Walter Katz
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 8:59 AM
To: IBIS-ATM
Subject: [ibis-macro] Mea Culpa, my critique of the Crosstalk BIRD last
week was incorrect.

 

All,

 

Mea Culpa, my critique of the Crosstalk BIRD last week was incorrect.
After a careful read I totally agree with the contents of the BIRD and
would support a motion to submit it to the Open Forum, with this
committees concurrence.

 

Not for Naught!

 

I did document an example of a coupled system containing a single victim
channel and two aggressor channels. The various elements of the Impulse
Response are defined using Touchstone notation, and the input and output
of the impulse response matrix for each Tx and Rx AMI_Init function call
is defined by rows and columns in the differential mode, coupled sNp
that represents any coupled channel.

 

I would like this document posted, and I would like the weekly minutes
to note it.

 

Walter

 

 

 

 

Walter Katz

wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx

Phone 303.449-2308

Mobile 303.883-2120

 

Other related posts: