HI Tom and the group,
Why whould anyone make decisions on a published design from 9 years ago
for a new high speed design unless the old recommedations are
revalidated for the new case? Your argument sounds good to me.
On Todd's view on using an 0201 cap. Separate from the electrical
characteristics, as these components get smaller and smaller, say
01-005 or maybe 0201, could they might become dangerous in the lab. If
a puff blows them into the air, one could breath them in like dust
particles, and be subject to severe respiratory problems, including
cancer. We should treat very small components with care iincludng not
getting them on your clothing where they could be carried into food and
other bad places.
New disease: capacatosis
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:31:57 -0400, Tom Dagostino
<tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Joel
The layout I saw and Steve Weir commented on had the vias so far away------------------------------------------------------------------
from the capacitor that the measured inductance was dominated by
circuit board traces. Steve fitted about 8 proper layouts within the
confines of the layout that Lee mentioned.
I asked Lee about this and he said the layout was something he found
on the X2Y web site I think it was in about 2007.
Since then X2Y has updated the layout and the Work Steve Weir did has
shown that with fewer X2Y caps the power supply noise was lower
compared to 0402 caps. This was shown with two layouts of FPGAs
running the same code and differing only in the caps used. My issue
here is the dragging out of data that does not represent current
recommended applications as proof anything.
I think I still have one of Steve's boards. His method was well
documented with measurements. He set up unused I/O cells high and low
and attached SMAs to them for ease of measurement. So he showed the
supply as the chip saw it.
Regards
Tom Dagostino
Tom Dagostino
Teraspeed LabsOn Mar 13, 2016 11:42 AM, Todd Hubing
<hubing@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
rare (on this mail list) example of someone supporting an argument
I wouldn't characterize the Zasio paper as bad information. It is a
with actual data from a test described well enough that anyone else
could repeat it. Yuriy Shlepnev's app note is another example of
this. Both of these studies demonstrate that, for the configurations
evaluated, two 0402 capacitors are probably a better choice than an
X2Y cap. Of course, it is possible to come up with configurations or
test criteria that favor the X2Y also. >
For printed circuit board decoupling, the X2Y via configuration isnot optimum. The two capacitors share a pair of ground vias that must
be relatively close to each other. If the power planes are more than
about 0.5 mm from the board surface, an IDC capacitor or a pair of
two-terminal capacitors can achieve better flux cancelation by
alternating closely spaced power and ground vias. That said, if
you're REALLY concerned about high-frequency decoupling, take Scott
McMorrow's advice and use 0201 caps. >
Todd >Todd H. Hubing > LearnEMC.com >
----------------------------------------------------------------- >
----------------------------------------------------------------- >
-----Original Message----- > From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Dagostino ;>
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2016 7:00 PM > To: leeritchey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Charles.Grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx;vrbanacm@xxxxxxxxxx; joel@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: X2Y
equivalent circuit model >
Lee > What was the date was that recommended mounting? Do westill believe Saturn is the furthest planet from the sun? Has X2Y
changed their recommendations since John did his measurements? Has
Steve Weir's work contradicted John's because Steve used the correct
layout? Why are you basing you argument on known bad information? >
Tom Dagostino > Teraspeed LabsOn Mar 12, 2016 2:27 AM, Lee Ritchey<leeritchey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On our web site,
www.speedingedge.com you can download the article by > > John Zasio
showing comparison of X2Y to 0402 capacitors mounted on the > > same
test PCB following the mounting instructions given by the vendor. > >
This should be the detail that some of you have requested. > > > >You can decide for yourself which to use from that data. > > > >
Lee Ritchey > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From:
si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > >
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joel Brown ;> >
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 10:05 AM > > To:
Charles.Grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: vrbanacm@xxxxxxxxxx;
si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: X2Y equivalent
circuit model > > > > I thought one of the things that make X2Y
capacitors lower inductance > > is that the current in each terminal
flows in opposite directions > > causing a cancellation effect. This
is from X2Y website: > > > > - Low inductance due to
cancellation effect > > > > I used them on some boards back when they
came out. I can't say they > > worked better than 0402 capacitors
because I did not do any detailed measurements. > > You really need
to consider the whole PDN system including the > > mounting
inductance, spreading inductance, IC package parasitics, > >
frequency spoectrum of IC switching current, any decoupling that
might > > be inside the IC package which is often an unknown. I think
this > > detailed kind of analysis would be nice to do but is rarely
done. IME > > I have never had a problem just following good design
practices. > > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Grasso, Charles <
Current thinking has it that the PDN performance is only as good as >Charles.Grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > >
the BGA decoupling is (for the most part) taken care of by the > > >the first pwb resonance (typically in the few hundreds of MHZ - I
have seen 300 as a commonly used > > > number) and > > > that
substrate capacitance. > > > > > > In other words - it is my
understanding that the board decouplers > > > don't really need to be
"high" performers are the frequencies of > > > interest are
(relatively) low. > > > > > > I'd appreciate the communities thoughts
on this. > > > > > > [Hello Mike - Good to "see" you again!] > > > >
303-204-2974 > > > (t) 3032042974@xxxxxxxxx > > > (e)Echostar Communications > > > (w) 303-706-5467 > > > (c)Best Regards > > > Charles Grasso > > > Compliance Engineer
charles.grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > > (e2) chasgrasso@xxxxxxxxx > > > > >
-----Original Message----- > > > From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxMichael Vrbanac > > > Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 9:42 AM > > > To:
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] ;> > > On Behalf Of
si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: X2Y equivalent
circuit model > > > > > > I agree that Steve had this correct. I had
some offline discussions > > > w/Steve back in that timeframe and
between that and the decoupling > > > capacitor/PDN performance
optimization research studies we did at in > > > my EMC design
research lab at Compaq on this topic back in the early > > > 90's,
also considering "side mounted decoupling capacitors" (yes, > > >
that format was around back then) because we were already seeing EMC
performance. > > > Anyway, Steve and I were in agreement that theyissues long before anyone became concerned about PDN
worked well enough > > > but that the layout and placement were
absolutely critical which > > > agrees with > > Scott's recent input
on this re: > > > spreading inductance and placement distance. If it
matters, we had > > > the test boards micro-sectioned after the fact
to make absolutely > > > sure that we made no assumptions about
mounting dimensional parameters. > > > IIRC, someone on that team
later wrote a paper on part of that study > > > (not all) but I have
since forgotten its title and the name of fe > > > llow who wrote it.
Sorry I cannot remember who but that was back in > > > the days when
my head was handed to me daily for saying what this > > > forum has
rightly understood these days as good engineering practice. > > > It
was heresy back then. BTW, as you might guess, the results of > > >
that study back then were in good agreement with most of what has > >
been posted on here as good design practice for quite some time. IForensics, President > > > > > > > > > On 03/11/2016 10:00 AM, David
hope that > > helps. > > > > > > Michael E. Vrbanac > > > EMC
Anthony wrote: > > > > Lee, the vendors dimensionally detail land pad
'recommendations' > > > > for > > > X2Y, but stay away from
dimensioning specific via layouts. Scroll > > > down to Johanson's
'PCB mounting' tab at this link: > > > >
http://www.johansondielectrics.com/x2y-filter-decoupling-capacitor ;>
Johanson shows 'stick' figure via > > > > layouts > > > in the PDNs# > > > > pcb > > > > > > > > Below the land pad dimensions,
Bypass applications section, notice the 'recommended' and > > 'poor'
you > > > downloaded a vendor document specifying the poor layoutlayout depictions, no dimensions. If any vendor sent you, or
please send > > > it to me. Steve would not specify that poor layout
as you suggest, > > > these early 2004-05 papers are just a few
examples of the low > > > inductance he > > preached: > > > > > > > >
Bypass Capacitor Inductance, Data Sheet Simplicity to Practical > > >
Reality > > > > > > >http://www.ipblox.com/pubs/DesignConEast_2005/DesignCon%20East%20200 ;
Capacitor Selection in FPGA Designs > > > >5% > > > 20TF2_ipb.pdf > > > > > > > > Considerations for
http://www.x2y.com/publications/decoupling/mar21-05.pdf ;> > > > > > >
-Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- >[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] ;> > > On Behalf Of Lee Ritchey
From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >
tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Cc: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'RaySent: Friday, March 11, 2016 1:07 AM > > > > To:
Anderson'; > > > > cristian.gozzi@xxxxxxxxx; > > >
Charles.Grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Ray Anderson' > > > > Subject:
[SI-LIST] Re: X2Y equivalent circuit model > > > > > > > > The board
layout complied exactly with what was specified by the > > >
vendor. I believe that that layout was specified by Steve. IT > >
looks like what is on his test PCB. > > > > > > > > -----OriginalMessage----- > > > > From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] ;> > > On Behalf Of Tom
Dagostino > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 10:19 AM > > > > To:
leeritchey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Cc: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Ray
Anderson' <raya@xxxxxxxxxx>; > > > cristian.gozzi@xxxxxxxxx;
Charles.Grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Ray Anderson' > > > <
ray.anderson@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: X2Y
equivalent circuit model > > > > > > > > Lee you know that board was
not the optimal layout. Steve told > > > > you it > > > was
incorrect. > > > > Tom Dagostino > > > > > > > > Tom Dagostino > > >
Teraspeed LabsOn Mar 9, 2016 8:30 AM, Lee Ritchey < > > >leeritchey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> We mounted the X2Y
capacitors exactly as specified in the > > > >> applications notes
provided by the vendor. > > > >> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Grasso, ;> > > >>From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >>
Charles > > > >> Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 7:46 AM > > > >> To:
leeritchey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; cristian.gozzi@xxxxxxxxx; 'Ray Anderson' >
'Ray Anderson' <raya@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: X2Y<ray.anderson@xxxxxxxxxx>; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >> Cc:
equivalent circuit model > > > >> > > > >> Hello Lee - What method is
used for a capacitor to be properly > > > >> mounted? So, if an X2Y
capacitor is properly mounted the <insert > > > >> metric here> will
not improve? > > > >> > > > >> Best Regards > > > >> Charles Grasso >
(w) 303-706-5467 > > > >> (c) 303-204-2974 > > > >> (t)Compliance Engineer > > > >> Echostar Communications > > > >>
3032042974@xxxxxxxxx > > > >> (e) charles.grasso@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > >
Message----- > > > >> From: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >>(e2) chasgrasso@xxxxxxxxx > > > >> > > > >> -----Original
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lee Ritchey ;> > >
cristian.gozzi@xxxxxxxxx; 'Ray Anderson'; > > > >>Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2016 5:44 AM > > > >> To:
si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >> Cc: 'Ray Anderson' > > > >> Subject:
[SI-LIST] Re: X2Y equivalent circuit model > > > >> > > > >> Our
tests show that the X2Y capacitor is no better than a > > > >>
properly mounted > > > >> 0402 capacitor. > > > >> > > > >>
-----Original Message----- > > > >> From:
si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >>
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Cristian Gozzi ;> >
<ray.anderson@xxxxxxxxxx>; si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >> Cc: RaySent: Friday, March 4, 2016 10:57 AM > > > >> To: Ray Anderson
Anderson <raya@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> Subject: [SI-LIST] Re: X2Y
equivalent circuit model > > > >> > > > >> Thanks > > > >> it worked
;-) > > > >> > > > >> Regards > > > >> Cristian > > > >> > > > >> Il
giorno gio 3 mar 2016 alle ore 10:04 Ray Anderson < > > > >>
ray.anderson@xxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto: > > > >> > > > >>> Cristian- > >
available > > > >>> from this web > > > >>> page: > > > >>> > > > >>>Johanson Dielectrics has downloadable spice models
http://www.johansondielectrics.com/x2y-filter-decoupling-capacit ;> >
http://www.johansondielectrics.com/downloads/JDI_X2Y_H-Spice_Fil ;> >or > > > >>> s > > > >>> > > > >>> download link: > > > >>>
should be usable in ADS using the ADS 'Hspice Compatibility > > > >>>es > > > >>> .z > > > >>> ip > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> They
Component' Wizard. (in fact I just confirmed that they import OK). >
Inc. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >-Ray Anderson > > > >>> > > > >>> Xilinx
[mailto:si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] ;> > > >>> On Behalf Of CristianFrom: si-list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >>>
Gozzi > > > >>> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 9:07 AM > > > >>> To:
si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >>> Subject: [SI-LIST] X2Y equivalent
circuit model > > > >>> > > > >>> Hi Si expert > > > >>> I was
looking for a good circuit model for X2Y capacitor to be > > > >>>
used in my ADS circuit simulation > > > >>> > > > >>> on internet I
found this > > > >>> > > > >>>
http://www.x2y.com/bypass/X2Y%20Equivalent%20Circuit%20for%20Models. ;
implemented it, something was wrong The > > > >>> impedance vs freq.pd > > > >>> f > > > >>> > > > >>> but when I tried to
shapes on log/log scale does not seem correct > > > >>> > > > >>> can
someone give to me any feedback or good reference to look for? > > >
---------------------------------------------------------------- > >thanks in advance > > > >>> Regards > > > >>> Cristian
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >-- > > > >>> To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >>>
web page, go to: > > > >>> //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;>field > > > >>> > > > >>> or to administer your membership from a
with 'help' in the Subject field > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> ListFor help: > > > >>> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
forum is accessible at: > > > >>>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > >>> > > > >>> List
archives are viewable at: > > > >>>
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > >>> > > > >>> Old
(prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > >
attachments are intended for the sole use of > > > >>> the named > >http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > >
This email and any
be > > > >>> proprietary, privileged or copyrighted under applicablerecipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may
law. If > > > >>> you are not the intended recipient, do not read,
copy, or > > > >>> forward this email message or any attachments.
Delete this email > > > >>> message and any > > > >> attachments
immediately. > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >>
----------------------------------------------------------------- > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >- > > > >> To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >>
web page, go to: > > > >> //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;>field > > > >> > > > >> or to administer your membership from a
'help' in the Subject field > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> List forumFor help: > > > >> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
is accessible at: > > > >>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> List
archives are viewable at: > > > >>
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> Old
(prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > > >>
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
AVG - www.avg.com > > > >> Version: 2015.0.6176 / Virus Database:----- > > > >> No virus found in this message. > > > >> Checked by
4537/11744 - Release Date: > > > >> 03/04/16 > > > >> > > > >>
----------------------------------------------------------------- > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >- > > > >> To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >>
web page, go to: > > > >> //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;>field > > > >> > > > >> or to administer your membership from a
'help' in the Subject field > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> List forumFor help: > > > >> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
is accessible at: > > > >>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> List
archives are viewable at: > > > >>
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> Old
(prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > > >>
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
----------------------------------------------------------------- > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >- > > > >> To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >>
web page, go to: > > > >> //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;>field > > > >> > > > >> or to administer your membership from a
'help' in the Subject field > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> List forumFor help: > > > >> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
is accessible at: > > > >>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> List
archives are viewable at: > > > >>
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> Old
(prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > > >>
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
----------------------------------------------------------------- > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >- > > > >> To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >>
web page, go to: > > > >> //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;>field > > > >> > > > >> or to administer your membership from a
'help' in the Subject field > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> List forumFor help: > > > >> si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
is accessible at: > > > >>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> List
archives are viewable at: > > > >>
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > >> > > > >> Old
(prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > > >>
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------ >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >
field > > > > > > > > or to administer your membership from a webpage, go to: > > > > //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;> > > >
in the Subject field > > > > > > > > > > > > List forum isFor help: > > > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help'
accessible at: > > > >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > > > > > > List
archives are viewable at: > > > >
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > > > > > > Old (prior
to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > >
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > > > > >message. > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > > > Version:
----- > > > > No virus found in this
2015.0.6176 / Virus Database: 4540/11792 - Release Date: > > >
03/11/16 > > > > > > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------ >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >
field > > > > > > > > or to administer your membership from a webpage, go to: > > > > //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;> > > >
in the Subject field > > > > > > > > > > > > List forum isFor help: > > > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help'
accessible at: > > > >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > > > > > > List
archives are viewable at: > > > >
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > > > > > > Old (prior
to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > >
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > >To unsubscribe from si-list: > > > >
field > > > > > > > > or to administer your membership from a webpage, go to: > > > > //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;> > > >
in the Subject field > > > > > > > > > > > > List forum isFor help: > > > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help'
accessible at: > > > >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > > > > > > List
archives are viewable at: > > > >
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > > > > > > Old (prior
to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > > >
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >
with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > > field > > > > > > or toTo unsubscribe from si-list: > > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
administer your membership from a web page, go to: > > >
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;> > > > > > For help: > > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field > > >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > > > > List archivesList forum is accessible at: > >
are viewable at: > > >
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > > > > Old (prior to
June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > >
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >
with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject > > > field > > > > > > or toTo unsubscribe from si-list: > > > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
administer your membership from a web page, go to: > > >
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;> > > > > > For help: > > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field > > >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > > > > List archivesList forum is accessible at: > >
are viewable at: > > >
//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > > > > 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: > >
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;> > > > For help: > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field > > >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > > List archives areList forum is accessible at: > >
viewable at: > > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > >
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: > >
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu ;> > > > > > > > > > ----- > > No virus
found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version:
2015.0.6176 / Virus Database: 4540/11800 - Release Date: > > 03/12/16
------------------------------------------------------------------ >
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: > >
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;> > > > For help: > >
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field > > >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;> > > > List archives areList forum is accessible at: > >
viewable at: > > //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;> > > >
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: >//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list ;>
For help: > si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in theSubject field >
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list ;>
List forum is accessible at: >
List archives are viewable at: >//www.freelists.org/archives/si-list ;>
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:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list
For help:
si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field
List forum is accessible at:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list
List archives are viewable at: //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list
Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at:
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
