P1394 Mail Archive: RE: [PP1394:00162] Re: Re[2]: P1394> Rough SBP-2 & IP1394 corecom

RE: [PP1394:00162] Re: Re[2]: P1394> Rough SBP-2 & IP1394 corecom

Nagasaka Fumio (Nagasaka.Fumio@exc.epson.co.jp)
Mon, 16 Feb 1998 16:43:16 +0900

Nobuhiko wrote:
<<
I may be wrong, or misunderstood your point due to my lack of knowledge,
but the questioning the ROM size to Ueda-san sounds very strange after
checking the back log you attatched.
>>

I don$B!G(Jt$B!G(J think so.(J
The $B!H(Jsubject$B!I(J of these mail is $B!H(JRough SBP-2 & IP1394 corecomponent(J
ROM sizes$B!I(J,(J
and Greg gave us how big ROM size would be if we use SBP-2 target and
initiator.

Toru said,
<<
If SBP2 implementation needs 30K for initiator and target, it might be
difficult to use it for consumer device.
>>

I would like to know what is acceptable size of ROM for consumer device.
May be various types of devices have their own implementation. However
I guess Toru knows DPP very well. So I think his information is
important.
--------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
Fumio Nagasaka
Epson Software Development Laboratory Inc.
Tel +81 268 25 4111, Fax +81 268 25 4627
E-mail to nagasaka.fumio@exc.epson.co.jp

-----Original Message-----
From: Nobuhiko Shinoda [SMTP:shinoda@bsd.canon.co.jp]
Sent: Monday, February 16, 1998 3:03 PM
To: pp1394 ML
Cc: Fumio Nagasaka; 'Toru Ueda'; Turner, Randy;
'Stephen Holmstead'; 'Brian Batchelder'; p1394@pwg.org
Subject: [PP1394:00162] Re: Re[2]: P1394> Rough
SBP-2 & IP1394 corecomponent ROM sizes

Nagasaka-san:

Seeing the previous mail of Ueda-san, the ROM size isuue
is not the discussing
point. And I hardly understand your comparison of the
code size to VxWorks or
Jet Send.

The value of 30k itself has not determined well enough.
Even if it is true,
does 30k cover real symmetric structure for the
equipment and some upper layer
i/f capability which Thin Protocol might cover to put on
DPP command/data set
?

I am slightly sensitive to talk about just ROM size
based on someone's
imagination or illusion which has not well identfied the
functionality.

Jet Send's code size is not worth for comparing or
discussing transport layer.
"Consumer" product is very sensitive to cost of code
size, but it also depends
on the benefit of "consumer". In my experience, the
first EOS system had 64kB
total ROM 10 years ago, but it was successful in the
market for the reason of
integration of automatic and manual tuning capability
with simple user
interface. JetSend might lead successful product in
consumer market regardless
of its code size. But this is not the discussiong point
in PWG-C.

I may be wrong, or misunderstood your point due to my
lack of knowledge, but
the questioning the ROM size to Ueda-san sounds very
strange after checking the
back log you attatched.

At 14:11 98/02/15 +0900, you wrote:
> Dear Toru san,
>
> One point.
> I think 30k is good size even for cheap consumer
devices.
> This size is smaller than typical VxWorks
implementation, and it
> may be smaller than JetSend.
>
> So please give us information how big your DPP ROM
size is expected to.
>

$B<DED!!?.Hf8E(J
$B#N#o#b#u#h#i#k#o!!#S#h#i#n#o#d#a(J
B$B%7%9%F%`3+H/ItItD9(J
General$B!!(JManager(J
BJ Printing System Development Division
B$B5!4o5;=Q3+H/%;%s%?!<I{=jD9(J
Assistant Senior General Manager
BJ Printing System Technology$B!!(JDevelopment Center(J
$B#C#a#n#o#n!!#I#n#c!%(J