Subject: Re: PMP> Next PMP Conference Call

From: [email-masked] (Bill Wagner)
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 20:58:49 -0500

I apologize for missing what probably was stated, but is the intent to 
     finalize the excellent list of 'interesting' printer states (as 
     supplemented by others), or to agree on all of the values associated 
     with each state?
     
     Further, assuming even that we are just finalizing the 'states', is it 
     implicit that compliance will require a printer to discern such 
     'states'? For example, I would regard Initial Power Up as a 'mute' 
     state in may cases simply because the printer can initialize before 
     the network interface sorts out who it is, where it is, does its 
     advertising, gets stacks built, and services the SNMP request.
     
     Finally, I again suggest that the MIB walk analysis must include the 
     results of the referenced sections of MIB-II, unless of course we have 
     decided that the requirement for these groups is not necessary in the 
     printer MIB. Indeed, the argument that the Systems Group objects may 
     belong to some (real) host system and not to the printer may also be 
     applied to the Interface Group. How is one to distinguish between an 
     interface on the host system and an interface on the printer. 
     Alternatively, the main thing the printer needs is an identification 
     of the interface for reference to channel and potentially job 
     information; for printer management, there seems to be little need  
     (and in some cases, little applicability) to the rest of the 
     parameters in the interface table. There are several things involved 
     here, including the handling of local interfaces on the printer, the 
     handling of multiple NIC's, the coding used for interface types not 
     identified in MIB-II, and the degree of support for the various 
     parameters in the interface table. Also, although it is independent of 
     the printer MIB per se, there should be some understanding of need to 
     which a well designed interface node (in the printer or external to 
     it) should support the entire (current) MIB-II. I believe this is 
     necessary because, to the extent that we say certain groups are 
     necessary, it is inferred that the unlisted groups need not be 
     supported. 
     
     (Sorry to be so long winded about this, but it is an area that I have 
     substantial difference in implementation)
     
     BTW, I have spent a little time on the wording of the 
     prtInterpreterFeedAddressability (and XFeedAddressibility), relying 
     upon memory of the discussions. What I do not remember however is what 
     anyone is going to use these values for. Considering that the tested 
     MIB implementations (I think) either misunderstood what was wanted or 
     put in a nominal value, is it going to be used for anything?
     
     Bill Wagner Osicom/DPI

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: PMP> Next PMP Conference Call
Author:  Lloyd Young <[email-masked]> at Internet
Date:    2/20/97 4:17 PM

We completed the review of the MIB Walk Results in the conference
call today. If my count is correct, we have 6 clarifications to the 
Printer MIB from reviewing the MIB walk.

The next PMP conference call will be on Wednesday March 5th from
2:00 to 4:00 PM EST (11:00 AM to 1:00 PM PST), access code: 820010,
phone number: 423-673-6717. The purpose of this call is to finalize 
the printer state conditions (err1.txt) published in e-mail dated 
2/18/97 from Chuck Adams. An updated copy of the pdf file has been 
placed on the PWG server. There were minor formatting problems in 
the original pdf file. The complete URL address to this file is 
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/pmp/contributions/err1.pdf. Discussion 
regarding these conditions and resolution of most open issues 
should occur via the mailing list. The purpose of the conference 
call is to resolve any open issues that cannot be closed via the 
mailing list.

Lloyd Young                       Phone: (606) 232-5150
Lexmark International Inc.        Fax: (606) 232-6740
740 New Circle Road NW            internet: [email-masked]
Lexington, KY 40511

---

From: Lloyd Young <[email-masked]>
Date: 5 Mar 97 11:37:33 EST

>     supplemented by others), or to agree on all of the values associated 

My desire is that both are finalized in this call.
     
>     advertising, gets stacks built, and services the SNMP request.

It is not required that a printer must discern such 'states' to be in
compliance. It is "strongly desired" that if a printer does detect 
these states that the alert look like the one proposed.
     
>     printer MIB.

Bill, At the start of the InterOp testing we discussed whether or not to
include MIB-II in our MIB walk results and decided that it was not necessary.
We can re-address this at the start of today's conference call if you like.

Lloyd Young