Subject: JMP> Re: Job MIB comments and questions

From: Tom Hastings <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 13:04:12 PDT

At 14:21 04/28/97 PDT, [email-masked] wrote:
>
>ok, you didn't understand steve's answer, i don't understand my question :-)
>
>now that we are communicating, let me try this answer to what question(s)
>i think you have
>
>please forgive me if i "insult" you by telling you what you already know
>
>please forgive me if i don't answer the right questions
>
>all disclaimers in place, we go on now
>
>there is no reason i know of to skip over oid arcs
>
>first, my understanding is that rfc 1759 uses
>
>   mib-2.43 printmib
>   prtGeneral  mib-2.43.5
>   prtCover    mib-2.43.6 }
>   prtLocalization  mib-2.43.7
>   prtInput   mib-2.43.8
>   prtOutput  mib-2.43.9
>   prtMarker mib-2.43.10
>   prtMarkerSupplies mib-2.43.11
>   prtMarkerColorant mib-2.43.12
>   prtMediaPath mib-2.43.13
>   prtChannel mib-2.43.14
>   prtInterpreter mib-2.43.15
>   prtConsoleDisplayBuffer mib-2.43.16
>   prtConsoleLights mib-2.43.17
>   prtAlert mib-2.43.18
>   prtMIBConformance mib-2.43.2
>
>no, i have to tell you that this is a bit odd ... usually, one would do
>this
>	foomib
>	foomib.1 foomibobjects
>	foomib.1.1 group 1
>	foomib.1.1.1 first object or table in group 1 of foomib
>	etc
>	foomib.1.2.1 first object or table in group 1 of foomib
>	etc
>	foomib.2 foomibconformance
>	etc

For the Job Monitoring MIB this would be:

        jobmonMIB
        jobmonMIB.1 jobmonMIBobjects
        jobmonMIB.1.1 jmGeneral
        jobmonMIB.1.2 jmJobID
        jobmonMIB.1.3 jmJobState
        jobmonMIB.1.4 jmAttribute
        jobmonMIB.2 jobmonMIBconformance

Correct?

>
>i think if you history buffs will dig a bit, you will recall that
>the mib had prtGeneral at 1 and the MIF had GeneralPrinter at 2
>
>this caused a mismatch/skew
>
>as a result, prtGeneral was moved to { printmib 2 } sometime around june of '94
>
>steve was consulted, and he said it wouldn't violate any rules, and he
>updated the draft accordingly
>
>sometime later, it got moved "farther to the right" as in { printmib 5 }
>and my ability to recollect is imperfect, but i believe it was again
>for the purposes of alignment with the dmtf mif
>
>also, if i remember correctly, at least the early drafts of the printer
>mib predate compliance and conformance statements and were stuck in later
>
>i don't know why it was put at 2 instead of 19, but it really just does
>not matter
>
>it is syntactically correct, it is semantically correct ... it just looks
>and feels a bit wierd
>
>i also agree with steve's response about the need for a dot for the
>Table and for the Entry, and that the entry dot is always .1, but i
>perceive that his answer is the right answer to a different question
>
>so, the short answer to
>
>>Is there any reason to skip over the first few OID arcs and to use
>>arc 2 for the conformance at the end?
>
>is no
>
>what i don't understand is why you aren't using 19, 20, 21, etc ... things
>"after" the end of the printer mib rather than counting from 1 again

You mean that the Job Monitoring MIB should be using the arcs
after the Printer MIB?

I had thought it would be its own MIB, even though it is being done by
the printmib WG.

>regards,
>jdc