Subject: IPP> Re: PMP> ISSUE: OCTET STRING MUST be US-ASCII in 0-127; allow other sets in 128-255

From: JK Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 11:49:47 -0400 (EDT)

Tom,

You're right.  You've really stepped into a mine field this time.

I'm not the only one in the PMP group who grows weary of this last-minute
attempt to change things.

THESE ISSUES NEED TO BE RESOLVED QUICKLY BY THE GROUP NOW.  This constant
barrage of issues and justifications and "What If's" and "Maybe someone
out there in the future may want to do something different" is totally
inappropriate at this point in time, IMHO.

Lloyd Young (Mr. Chairman):  please see what you can do to draw consensus
on these issues as quickly as possible, ok?  All of us in the PMP group
would like to see these discussions end as quickly as possible.  Thanks.

Tom, regarding your last message (to Dave Kellerman):

> I should have separated my comments into separate e-mail messages more.

Yes!!!  This would certainly help each of us keep track of the issues.
Please keep your email messages targeted on a SINGLE issue/proposal/etc.

> Bottom line: ok with me to keep prtChannelInformation as NVT ASCII.

Great!  End of discussion, right?  (Rhetorical question!  No reply needed ;-)

> 3. But why do we want to restrict our new object: prtGeneralPrinterName
> to NVT ASCII?  Can't system administrators define printer names in other
> character sets (as long as ASCII is in 32-127)?  I would suspect that
> a printer that is using ISO Latin 1 or HP Roman 8 or JIS X0208 would allow the
> accented letters to be part of printer names in Europe or Asia, wouldn't it?
> 
> However, I see no reason for the prtGeneralPrinterName to be restricted
> to NVT ASCII.  Do  you?  Ok if we change prtGeneralPrinterName from 
> DisplayString to OCTET STRING?
>
> [...]
>
> 3. Change SYNTAX of prtGeneralPrinterName from DisplayString (NVT ASCII)
> to OCTET STRING.  OK with you?

Look, I am the original author of the prtGeneralAdminName MIB object.
The intent of this object is to provide a "binding mechanism" between
an instance of the Printer MIB and a "printer" as defined on a host
platform.

So, it really comes down to this:  if the host platform allows for
internationalized names for "printer" objects defined in the local
printing system, then fine, we'll probably need OCTET STRING instead
of DisplayString.

However, what platforms out there now (much less in the next 3 years)
allow for such internationalized names?  I can certainly be convinced
of the need for OCTET STRING if someone can come forward with hard
instances of such platforms.

> 2. Change SYNTAX of prtChannelInformation from DisplayString (NVT ASCII)
> to OCTET STRING.  NOT OK with you.

No, do not change prtChannelInformation to OCTET STRING.  Leave it alone.

We really must close up these discussions, pronto.  Let's hear from the
others on the PMP list asap, ok?  I would particularly like to hear from
Bob Pentecost (HP) and Harry Lewis (IBM), as well as the many other fine
folks who have invested considerable time in developing the Printer MIB
over the last four years.

	...jay

---

From: JK Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 12:12:47 -0400 (EDT)

I am terribly sorry, but I accidentally cc:'d the IPP list rather than
the PMP list on that last message.  Please disregard.

Those of us who must simultaneously dance across no fewer than *three*
PWG standards efforts sometimes get confused...  ;-)

	...jay