[SI-LIST] Re: risetime effects of plane breaks

John,
Thanks for the additional info. However, I am starting to wonder if there is
a confusion on the term "return" here. I think in Doug's experiment return
is for switching signals and its return image current to the driver. It
seems in your reference below, return means power return to the voltage
regular or power supply. Am I making the right guess here ? Or do you still
mean the I/O signal return ?
Also it will help to figure out if your offending EMI noise is related to
I/O or core clock frequencies (if they can be seperated). And which power
3.3 or 1.8 is used to power the I/O. If it is the later and you have an EMI
offending frequency related to I/O, it may be indeed an I/O return problem
that can be benefit from simply swapping the power planes.

-----Original Message-----
From: John Matthews [mailto:john.matthews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 8:29 AM
To: Chris.Cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: ''SI-List' '
Subject: RE: [SI-LIST] Re: risetime effects of plane breaks


Chris

Our products are shipped in plastic boxes. We have on occasion
metallised the inside of the boxes to help with extra shielding, but
it's expensive as it normally
has to be done at another site, so there is transportation cost as well
as the cost of metallization. If it is ever done for a product, the very
next step is to look at
how we can get rid of it. Note to Steve - I've had no warpage problems,
I don't think the boards are big enough.

The general problem with an actual shield is that hard tooling reduces
the cost of the shields, but the tooling is itself very expensive, so
you need to be guaranteed 
Volume to justify. With soft tooling the cost of the shields increase
dramatically.

The boards we design use PowerQUICC BGAs. In general because the are
several supply voltages, it is almost impossible to get away with four
layers.

I am taking some lessons from this. Top and bottom ground fills were
introduced because using copper tape (on the bottom layer) in the
chamber showed significant
Improvements early in the design cycle, so this approach was adopted on
subsequent boards.

The main lesson I am taking from this is that I think we need to look at
where our return currents are going. As Fred pointed out, we are getting
noise on our power planes
and all we are trying to do is push that noise above 1GHz. For new
boards, a better approach would be to figure out why the noise is
getting on the planes in the first 
place, and stop this from happening. 

As well as that Steve has made suggestions which are well worth
considering. I will be researching all this over the next while.

-----Original Message-----
From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Chris Cheng
Sent: 19 January 2005 05:07
Cc: ''SI-List' '
Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: risetime effects of plane breaks


Steve,
Your last comment on microstrip is exactly what I was thinking. Anyways,
it almost sounds like it is a trade off between adding shielding skin in
enclosure vs. shield layers on PCB. At 50-60MHz and such a small board,
SI doesn't seem to be an issue and it seems like John's example only
need 2 signal layers out of 6. Whether the skin on enclosure cost more
than the extra PCB layers is beyond me.

-----Original Message-----
From: steve weir
To: Chris.Cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'SI-List'
Sent: 1/18/2005 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] Re: risetime effects of plane breaks

Chris, a microstrip will tend to be more EMC trouble, but it can be
done, 
and certainly has many times, particularly if one reserves the board
edges 
for ground fill.  Depending on the type of parts and density opportunity

for traces on the component side could be quite limited.  As far as
ground 
on the top, more rather than less properly stitched ground fill is
almost 
always a good thing.

W/o that extra shield provided by the box, stripline is proven to make
EMC 
compliance easier.  You can go all the way back to papers in the early 
1980's to see comparisons.  It doesn't mean that you can't you
microstrip 
and an argument can be made that given a choice of remaining microstrip
for 
100% of the route versus exciting the cavities, an end to end microstrip

can actually sometimes be better both SI and EMC-wise.  As with most 
issues, it depends on the circumstances.

Best Regards,


Steve



At 12:07 PM 1/18/2005 -0800, Chris Cheng wrote:
>Steve, John and Doug,
>I have to say this is more on consumer/high volume cost sensitive EMI
gig
>which I have no experience in. But why is signal on top of solid gnd
type
>microstrip so evil that you have to start off with com/gnd fill or
gnd/power
>fill on top and bottom layers ? At 50-60MHz, microstrip should be more
than
>enough for SI. Hack I can make a case it will be great to route PECL 
>highspeed differential signals on top straight from component to
component
>without vias. Does stripline buys you that much EMI margin in low end
boxes
>? Speaking for racks like server or even workstations design, they
harder
>matter. Crossing cut planes with single ended microstrip signals is
obvious
>bad.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: steve weir [mailto:weirsp@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 8:45 AM
>To: John Matthews; Chris.Cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>Cc: 'SI-List'
>Subject: RE: [SI-LIST] Re: risetime effects of plane breaks
>
>
>John, don't you have a problem with warpage
>
>There are a couple of things to consider here:
>
>1. A cavity may be broken-up with either an open or a short. a. Use 
>ferrites and bypass caps to break-up voltage planes. b. Use stitching 
>vias to break-up ground / ground cavities
>
>2. Your present layout does ugly things when signals switch from layer
2 to
>layer 3.
>
>3. If you are running high edge rate signals on layer 2 across splits
in
>layer 1, you are creating problems.
>
>I would suggest you look hard at the feasibility of:
>
>1. Comp / gnd fill
>thick dielectric
>2. S E/W routes
>thin dielectric
>3  Gnd / 3v3  E/W stripes
>core dielectric
>4. Gnd / 3v3  N/S  stripes
>thin dielectric
>5. S N/S routes
>thick
>6. 1V8 / gnd fill
>
>Depending on how much 3v3 power you need and where, this may or may not

>work for you.  Any given stripe would be as wide as practical and
stitched
>frequently to the matching polarity stripes on the adjacent layer. Fast

>edge rate signals would track only over the ground stripes.  Spacing
from
>1-2 would be substantially greater than from 2-3, ditto for 5-6 vs 4-5.
>
>Now, the vias effect small cavities for both the GND and 3v3 layers.
You
>have some additional flexibility on whether to forego the ferrites to
>divide the 3v3 islands or not.   They still form cavities with layer 1
and
>layer 6 fill, so if you can afford the limitation in signal returns,
you
>can gain with the ferrites.  However, if you cannot, emphasizing ground

>perimeter on 1 and 6 and stitching that through to an outer perimeter
of
>gnd on 3 and 4 should work pretty well.  You can think of this scheme
as
>essentially a differential routing method.
>
>The main disadvantage of this method is the inductance that you will
see
>between the 3v3 and ground.  However, since you have adopted an
islanding
>approach, you are already largely at the mercy of your bypass caps.  If
you
>are clever with your sizing and placement, you can mitigate the
difference
>between this approach and what you have been doing.
>
>Steve.
>
>
>
>
>At 04:35 PM 1/17/2005 +0000, John Matthews wrote:
> >I find this discussion very interesting because of the method we used
to
> >reduce EMI on our boards.
> >
> >We do router boards with various telecoms interfaces. They operate
off a
> >wallplug 5V power supply,
> >and are shipped in a plastic case. The boards are six layer, from top
to
> >bottom as follows:
> >
> >1. Components and ground fill
> >2. Signal
> >3. Signal
> >4. Ground
> >5. 3V3
> >6. 1V8 and ground fill
> >
> >The ground fills are stitched at 15mm intervals.
> >
> >Over the last year we've migrated to this from our initial efforts, 
> >which were classical sig-sig-pwr-gnd-sig-sig
> >
> >In relation to the experiments with split planes, we have found that
the
> >only way to reduce EMI on our boards has been to
> >break up the 3V3 and 1V8 planes into smaller planes.
> >
> >Initially we had huge problems with radiated EMC at approx 500MHz 
> >upwards. Main bus clock was between 50-66MHz. Board size was approx 
> >220x150mm, the planes were not entirely rectangular, but the longest 
> >diagonal was 260mm.
> >
> >We took the approach of breaking up the power planes into more
localised
> >planes connected to the source with ferrites.
> >As our planes have got smaller, we've seen the EMC frequencies
increase,
> >so our main problem is now at 850MHz.
> >
> >Unfortunately this corresponds with one of the ground plane diagonals
> >(176mm) and we are concluding that this is one of the resonant 
> >frequencies of the plane.
> >
> >I'm a bit stuck for ideas now, because my one golden rule is not to 
> >split the ground plane. But that's my problem.
> >
> >I'm interested, because the experiments discussed suggest that split 
> >planes will cause you problems, in our case we've found that we had 
> >to do this, because it was the planes themselves
were
> >radiating. Are we simply dealing with the lesser of
> >two evils in my case?
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >On Behalf Of steve weir
> >Sent: 15 January 2005 00:03
> >To: Chris.Cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Cc: SI-List
> >Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: risetime effects of plane breaks
> >
> >
> >Chris, wire, insulator, plane w/split, dielectric, solid plane.
> >
> >Best Regards,
> >
> >
> >Steve.
> >
> >At 03:35 PM 1/14/2005 -0800, Chris Cheng wrote:
> > >Doug,
> > >Just try to understand your new stack up,
> > >is it :
> > >signal-splitplane-solid plane
> > >or
> > >splitplane-signal-solid plane  ?
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Doug Smith [mailto:doug@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > >Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 3:17 PM
> > >To: weirsp@xxxxxxxxxx
> > >Cc: emcesd2000@xxxxxxxxx; SI-List
> > >Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: risetime effects of plane breaks
> > >
> > >
> > >Wow! I didn't realize my little article would stimulate so many 
> > >postings. Having a good discussion like this is good for us all.
> > >
> > >While teaching a seminar in San Diego yesterday I did a slight 
> > >modification of the split plane board I used for my article this
month.
> >
> > >I covered the bottom plane split (opposite signal wire with copper
tape
> >
> > >and measured the ESD immunity via radiation from an ESD event. This
was
> >
> > >the first time for this setup and live for the class. I scoured the

> > >tape many times to make sure connection was made through the 
> > >"conductive" adhesive.
> > >
> > >The immunity was significantly worst (0.5 Volts induced in path)
than
> > >the path over solid plane (0.1 Volt) and better than the path where

> > >both planes were cut (1.5 Volts induced EMI).
> > >
> > >Doug
> > >
> > >For the 30 or so mil plane spacing of the board
> > >
> > >steve weir wrote:
> > > > Oscar, yes, it is quite a dramatic effect isn't it?  I suspect
that
> >
> > > > when Lee says "it depends on how you do it" he has another 
> > > > contiguous plane, ie
> > >
> > > > ground underneath the split as opposed to a split on all planes
as
> > > > in Doug's experiment.  Assuming lots of decoupling between each
of
> > > > the
> > >islands
> > > > and the common ground plane the jump in coupling between lines 
> > > > would be greatly suppressed.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Steve.
> > > >
> > > > At 11:00 AM 1/10/2005 -0800, Ahmad Fallah wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>Hi Steve,
> > > >>
> > > >>I have repeated Doug's experiment with a modified fixture where
an
> > > >>additional trace (victim) was added near (~1 cm) the "signal"
line
> > > >>for X-talk measurements.  I have measured a 10-fold increase in 
> > > >>x-talk amplitude in going from Case 1 to Case 2.
> > > >>
> > > >>Case 1: the offending and victim lines are both drawn over a
solid
> > > >>return plane. Case 2: the offending and victim lines are both
drawn
> > > >>over the cut in the return plane
> > > >>
> > > >>Regards,
> > > >>
> > > >>Oscar
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>steve weir <weirsp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>Lee, the 5cm is the length of the break. The break is only about

> > > >>20-50mils wide. Hit the link and scroll to Figure 3. In Doug's
test
> > > >>set-up, both of the two planes have been broken. Now, If one
cares
> > > >>to do a crosstalk test, it looks like Doug could modify his
fixture
> > > >>rather easily to do that. In the vicinity of the break, the
multiple
> >
> > > >>line coupling, including between members of a diff pair jumps.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>If you want to perform an entertaining experiment, take a diff
pair,
> >
> > > >>or just one active driver and a quiet line and route them over a

> > > >>narrow, and short break, say 0.25" by 0.02" and take four port S

> > > >>parameter measurements. Take another pair and do likewise, but
keep
> > > >>extending the length of the slot, ie perpendicular to the traces
by
> > > >>a factor of 2 with each test. Even though the width of the gap
is
> > > >>short, by the time that slot becomes an inch or two long the
band of
> >
> > > >>frequencies where coupling is fairly strong will be pretty wide.
> > > >>
> > > >>http://emcesd.com/tt2005/tt010105.htm
> > > >>
> > > >>Regards,
> > > >>
> > > >>Steve
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>At 04:30 PM 1/9/2005 -0800, Lee Ritchey wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>>Just noticed that you call a 5 cm break relatively small. Does
that
> >
> > > >>>mean 5 cm in width?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Lee W. Ritchey
> > > >>>Speeding Edge
> > > >>>P. O. Box 2194
> > > >>>Glen Ellen, CA 95442
> > > >>>Phone- 707-568-3983
> > > >>>FAX- 707-568-3504
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I just used the energy it took to be angry to write some blues.

> > > >>>Count Basie
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>[Original Message]
> > > >>>>From: Doug Smith
> > > >>>>To: SI-List
> > > >>>>Date: 1/8/2005 5:23:26 PM
> > > >>>>Subject: [SI-LIST] risetime effects of plane breaks
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>I think most of us know not to route signals over plane breaks
on
> > > >>>>PWBs as all kinds of bad things can happen when this occurs in
a
> > > >>>>layout. But, how do you convince co-workers or your boss that
a
> > > >>>>new design needs to avoid doing this even if added expense or 
> > > >>>>project delay is required? Experimental data can be the key
and
> > > >>>>this month my Technical Tidbit shows what happens to signal 
> > > >>>>risetime if the signal crosses a plane break.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Crossing Ground Plane Breaks - Part 4
> > > >>>>Risetime Effects on Signals
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Abstract: Signals that cross ground plane breaks on printed
wiring
> >
> > > >>>>boards (PWBs) experience degradation as well as cause EMI 
> > > >>>>problems. Significant degradation of signal risetime is shown
to
> > > >>>>occur, even with a relatively small ground break of five cm at

> > > >>>>risetimes on the order of 300 ps.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>The link to the article is the picture of the experimental
test
> > > >>>>setup at the bottom of the home page at http://emcesd.com .
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>Doug
> > > >>>>--
> > > >>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>>___ _ Doug Smith
> > > >>>>\ / ) P.O. Box 1457
> > > >>>>========= Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457
> > > >>>>_ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799
> > > >>>>/ /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528
> > > >>>>| q-----( ) | o | Email: doug@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > >>>>\ _ / ] \ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org
> > > >>>>-------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>>
> > >
>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>>To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
with
> > > >>>>'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> > > >>>>http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>For help:
> > > >>>>si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>List FAQ wiki page is located at: 
> > > >>>>http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.org
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>List archives are viewable at: 
> > > >>>>http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > >>>>or at our remote archives: 
> > > >>>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > >>>>Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: 
> > > >>>>http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with

> > > >>>'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > > >>>
> > > >>>or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> > > >>>http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > > >>>
> > > >>>For help:
> > > >>>si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > > >>>
> > > >>>List FAQ wiki page is located at: 
> > > >>>http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > > >>>
> > > >>>List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.org
> > > >>>
> > > >>>List archives are viewable at: 
> > > >>>http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > >>>or at our remote archives: 
> > > >>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > >>>Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: 
> > > >>>http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
>>------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
> > > >>'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > > >>
> > > >>or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> > > >>http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > > >>
> > > >>For help:
> > > >>si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > > >>
> > > >>List FAQ wiki page is located at: 
> > > >>http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > > >>
> > > >>List technical documents are available at:
http://www.si-list.org
> > > >>
> > > >>List archives are viewable at: 
> > > >>http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > >>or at our remote archives: 
> > > >>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > >>Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: 
> > > >>http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
>>------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
> > > >>'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > > >>
> > > >>or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> > > >>http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > > >>
> > > >>For help:
> > > >>si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > > >>
> > > >>List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > > >>                http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > > >>
> > > >>List technical documents are available at:
> > > >>                http://www.si-list.org
> > > >>
> > > >>List archives are viewable at:
> > > >>                http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > >>or at our remote archives:
> > > >>                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > >>Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > > >>                http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
> > > > 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> > > >
> > > > or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> > > > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > > >
> > > > For help:
> > > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > > >
> > > > List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > > >                 http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > > >
> > > > List technical documents are available at:
> > > >                 http://www.si-list.org
> > > >
> > > > List archives are viewable at:
> > > >               http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > > > or at our remote archives:
> > > >               http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > > > Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > > >               http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >------------------------------------------------------------
> > >      ___          _            Doug Smith
> > >       \          / )           P.O. Box 1457
> > >        =========               Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457
> > >     _ / \     / \ _            TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799
> > >   /  /\  \ ] /  /\  \          Mobile:  408-858-4528
> > >|  q-----( )  |  o  |         Email:   doug@xxxxxxxxxx
> > >   \ _ /    ]    \ _ /          Web:     http://www.dsmith.org
> > >------------------------------------------------------------
> > >------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >To unsubscribe from si-list:
> > >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject
field
> > >
> > >or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> > >http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > >
> > >For help:
> > >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > >
> > >List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > >                 http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > >
> > >List technical documents are available at:
> > >                 http://www.si-list.org
> > >
> > >List archives are viewable at:
> > >                 http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > >or at our remote archives:
> > >                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > >Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > >                 http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > >
> > >------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >To unsubscribe from si-list:
> > >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject
field
> > >
> > >or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> > >http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> > >
> > >For help:
> > >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> > >
> > >List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> > >                 http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> > >
> > >List technical documents are available at:
> > >                 http://www.si-list.org
> > >
> > >List archives are viewable at:
> > >                 http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> > >or at our remote archives:
> > >                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> > >Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> > >                 http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe from si-list:
> >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
> >
> >or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
> >http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
> >
> >For help:
> >si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
> >
> >List FAQ wiki page is located at:
> >                 http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
> >
> >List technical documents are available at:
> >                 http://www.si-list.org
> >
> >List archives are viewable at:
> >                 http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
> >or at our remote archives:
> >                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
> >Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
> >                 http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> >
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from si-list:
>si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field
>
>or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: 
>http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
>
>For help:
>si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
>
>List FAQ wiki page is located at:
>                 http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ
>
>List technical documents are available at:
>                 http://www.si-list.org
>
>List archives are viewable at:
>                 http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
>or at our remote archives:
>                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
>Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
>                 http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
>

------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field

or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list

For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field

List FAQ wiki page is located at:
                http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ

List technical documents are available at:
                http://www.si-list.org

List archives are viewable at:     
                http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
                http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
  
------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from si-list:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field

or to administer your membership from a web page, go to:
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list

For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field

List FAQ wiki page is located at:
                http://si-list.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Si-List_FAQ

List technical documents are available at:
                http://www.si-list.org

List archives are viewable at:     
                http://www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
or at our remote archives:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
                http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
  

Other related posts: