Subject: Re: PMP> Traps

From: [email-masked] (Ira Mcdonald x10962)
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 08:38:45 PST

Hi Jay and PMP folks,

No, SENSE is not the answer.  The question is how to register
with an SNMP Agent on an SNMP manageable device for traps.

SENSE may be a good idea, but it's a NEW protocol, and it
certainly does NOT tell a client how to DIRECTLY register
with an SNMP manageable device for SNMP traps.

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald

>--------------------- Included Message --------------------------<
>From [email-masked] Fri Apr  4 10:09:50 1997
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 07:03:24 PST
From: JK Martin <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re:  PMP> Traps
Cc: [email-masked]
Status: R

Ira,

> Why bother to have standard traps, if there's no
> standard way to register for them.  Why bother to have the
> idea of 'trap-directed polling', if you can't get the traps.
> Xerox folks think this seriously hampers the utility of the
> Printer MIB.

You're not alone in this concern.  You've stated the precise reason
why the PWG SENSE project was started, to design a method of
registering for async events (eg, traps) and to receive them in
a reasonably reliable manner.

> Perhaps it's worth having a (localized) fix
> imbedded in the Printer MIB V2.0 - certainly it's impossible
> to show interworking in traps, unless two vendors still 
> support the deprecated Party MIB (RFC 1447) - any volunteers?

Once we put the Job MIB to bed, perhaps we'll have some cycles
available to focus on the SENSE effort as a means of providing
this kind of capability, at least for printers.

	...jay