attachment-0001
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">There are enough differing viewpoints
that a conference call may be in order to help sort this topic and clear
up some of the misunderstandings. </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">If a core group can agree on a time
I will distribute the dial-in information. </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">This doesn't necessarily have to be
a repeating time slot. I'd like to get this ironed out before Tokyo.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I will start out suggesting Thursday
3/31 10AM PST, 1PM EST (directly following the PWG Steering Committee call).
Please indicate the possibility of your attending or suggest a different
time.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">----------------------------------------------
<br>
Harry Lewis <br>
IBM STSM<br>
Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group<br>
http://www.pwg.org<br>
IBM Printing Systems <br>
http://www.ibm.com/printers<br>
303-924-5337<br>
---------------------------------------------- </font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>"McDonald, Ira"
<imcdonald@sharplabs.com></b> </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: pmp-owner@pwg.org</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">03/28/2005 02:01 PM</font>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">To</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"'Ivan Pavicevic'" <ivanp@windows.microsoft.com>,
"Bergman, Ron" <Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com>, Dennis Carney/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS,
pmp@pwg.org, "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com></font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cc</font></div>
<td>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port
Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated
March 21, 2005</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2><tt>Hi,<br>
<br>
Please - will people stop just saying 'in the MIB'. Only Ivan has<br>
spoken precisely enough in this thread (by always saying either <br>
'HR MIB' or 'Printer MIB' explicitly) to make his meaning clear.<br>
<br>
And since you all three (Ivan, Ron, Dennis) just quietly _disagreed_<br>
because of obscurity about what's a 'port' and what's 'static' in a<br>
configuration, let me try once more.<br>
<br>
[Per Ivan]<br>
- Status in Longhorn TcpMon comes ONLY from Host Resources MIB<br>
- Ports in the 'ppmPortTable' should NOT be deleted when<br>
the software/hardware status of a 'port' changes <br>
- because the Longhorn TcpMon tool will only read the<br>
'ppmPortTable' _once_ (to find 'hrDeviceIndex' values)<br>
- Configuration (but NOT status) in Longhorn TcpMon comes from<br>
Printer MIB<br>
- All 'ports' that have the same 'hrDeviceIndex' will always have<br>
the same displayed status in TcpMon<br>
<br>
Ron and Dennis - please let's not waste time on discussing how<br>
the Printer MIB was meant to be used. The Printer MIB isn't even<br>
in the logic path for 'port' status in Longhorn's TcpMon.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
- Ira<br>
<br>
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)<br>
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc<br>
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839<br>
phone: +1-906-494-2434<br>
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com <br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Ivan Pavicevic [mailto:ivanp@windows.microsoft.com]<br>
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 3:04 PM<br>
To: Bergman, Ron; Dennis Carney; pmp@pwg.org; McDonald, Ira<br>
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft<br>
dated March 21, 2005<br>
<br>
<br>
TcpMon will use the hrDeviceIndex to query for the printer status from
Host<br>
Resource MIB and to query for the printer configuration from the Printer
MIB<br>
(support for new features in Longhorn OS). <br>
>From the TcpMon perspective, if hrDeviceIndex is reused in the multiport<br>
device, queries described above will hit the same MIB object for different<br>
ports. If this is acceptable for the printer device then we are fine with<br>
this. Note that TcpMon will get data from the Port MIB during printer<br>
installation to allow the user to make a choice between different ports.
If<br>
the printer removes the port entry from the table in the Port MIB due to
the<br>
functioning failure, the port won't be listed as an option to be picked
by<br>
the user. Hence I agree that the Port MIB should reflect configuration
of<br>
the ports, not the status.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Ivan<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org] On Behalf Of Bergman,
Ron<br>
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 10:22 AM<br>
To: Dennis Carney; pmp@pwg.org; McDonald, Ira<br>
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft<br>
dated March 21, 2005<br>
<br>
Dennis' comments seem to echo the concern I voiced last week. And
I agree<br>
with Dennis that a unique<br>
value of hrDeviceIndex is not needed for each service. I have also
reviewed<br>
the document and do not find<br>
any text that indicates the value of hrDeviceIndex cannot be the same for<br>
all services.<br>
<br>
hrDeviceIndex references a "device" and should not be overloaded
to also<br>
indicate a port within a device.<br>
Although I cannot speak for all printers, in the implementations I am<br>
familiar with, it is very unlikely that<br>
only an LPR port or a raw socket port is "down". If a port
is disabled (per<br>
the configuration), as Dennis<br>
stated, it will not be present in the MIB. The MIB should be essentially<br>
"Static" and only be modified by<br>
a configuration change.<br>
<br>
Ron<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org]On Behalf Of Dennis Carney<br>
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 9:10 AM<br>
To: pmp@pwg.org; McDonald, Ira<br>
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft
d<br>
ated March 21, 2005<br>
Hi Ira,<br>
<br>
I would have said that if specifically the LPR port is down for whatever<br>
reason, it wouldn't be listed in the MIB. This opinion was my first<br>
(intuitive) reaction, but it also does not seem to be wrong based on a
quick<br>
reading of the document.<br>
<br>
Is there a feeling among the people who have been working the most on this<br>
MIB that it is supposed to be "static"--have essentially hard-coded
rows and<br>
values for a given printer model? If so, this should probably be made clear<br>
in the document.<br>
<br>
Dennis Carney<br>
IBM Printing Systems<br>
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com><br>
<br>
<br>
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com> <br>
03/27/2005 09:30 AM<br>
To<br>
Dennis Carney/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>,<br>
pmp@pwg.org<br>
<br>
cc<br>
<br>
Subject<br>
RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated
March<br>
21, 2005<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Hi Dennis,<br>
<br>
OK - I probably picked an unwise example.<br>
<br>
If one software channel (LPR) is down, because the thread<br>
crashed (or the operator took down the LPR service), then<br>
EVERY software channel is going to show as down, on your<br>
network printer (remember MS does NOT read Printer MIB).<br>
<br>
You're conflating all hardware status with the software<br>
status of channels/interpreters.<br>
<br>
But you're welcome to decide this is 'normal' behavior.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
- Ira<br>
<br>
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)<br>
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc<br>
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839<br>
phone: +1-906-494-2434<br>
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com <br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Dennis Carney [mailto:dcarney@us.ibm.com]<br>
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 4:37 PM<br>
To: McDonald, Ira; pmp@pwg.org<br>
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft
d<br>
ated March 21, 2005<br>
<br>
<br>
Hi Ira,<br>
<br>
Ira wrote:<br>
>If a vendor implements a single 'hrDeviceIndex' value for all ports
(i.e.,<br>
channels) <br>
>on the "same" printer, then if ANY port is 'down' in 'hrDeviceStatus'
they<br>
will ALL <br>
>be shown 'down' in the MS tools. That's not acceptable behaviour.<br>
<br>
To me, that *does* seem like acceptable behavior (or if you'd prefer,<br>
"behaviour"--is that your proximity to Canada showing? :-).<br>
<br>
If I am a single network printer advertising both an LPR port and a RAW<br>
port, if my one input tray is out of paper, then *both* ports *should*
be in<br>
an "out of paper" state in the host resources MIB.<br>
<br>
If instead I want to differentiate between the two (I really can't think
of<br>
many good reasons to do this on a network printer), I can do this using
two<br>
different indices into the hr MIB. But I would have guessed that 99% of<br>
network printers would simply have all advertised ports (correctly, IMHO)<br>
point to the same hr MIB entry.<br>
<br>
Dennis Carney<br>
IBM Printing Systems<br>
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com><br>
<br>
<br>
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com> <br>
03/26/2005 09:12 AM<br>
<br>
To<br>
Dennis Carney/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, pmp@pwg.org<br>
<br>
<br>
cc<br>
"Adams, Charles A" <charles.a.adams@office.xerox.com>,
"'Bergman, Ron'"<br>
<Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com>, mfenelon@windows.microsoft.com<br>
<br>
<br>
Subject<br>
RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated
March<br>
21, 2005<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Hi Dennis,<br>
<br>
The Introduction and Background were recently added, for boilerplate<br>
reasons.<br>
They are not authoritative and in fact have not been reviewed.<br>
<br>
Microsoft is NOT using the Printer MIB for status at all in Longhorn (per<br>
Mike<br>
Fenelon). The 'hrDeviceTable' and 'hrPrinterTable' in the Host Resources
MIB<br>
<br>
are the only status that will be displayed by Longhorn for printer ports.<br>
<br>
If a vendor implements a single 'hrDeviceIndex' value for all ports (i.e.,<br>
channels) <br>
on the "same" printer, then if ANY port is 'down' in 'hrDeviceStatus'
they<br>
will ALL <br>
be shown 'down' in the MS tools. That's not acceptable behaviour.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
- Ira<br>
<br>
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)<br>
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc<br>
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839<br>
phone: +1-906-494-2434<br>
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com <br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Dennis Carney [mailto:dcarney@us.ibm.com]<br>
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 2:43 PM<br>
To: pmp@pwg.org<br>
Cc: Adams, Charles A; McDonald, Ira; 'Bergman, Ron';<br>
mfenelon@windows.microsoft.com<br>
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft
d<br>
ated March 21, 2005<br>
<br>
Ira, My reading of the "Introduction" and the "Background"
of the document<br>
seems to make it clear that the main MS model *IS* an embedded printer.<br>
<br>
Mike Fenelon, is it really true that your port monitor makes it such that<br>
each port *has to* have a different ppmPortHrDeviceIndex? If a network<br>
printer implemented this MIB and advertised both an LPR and a RAW port,<br>
would you really have a problem if both ports had a ppmPortHrDeviceIndex
of<br>
1?<br>
<br>
Dennis<br>
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com><br>
<br>
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com> <br>
Sent by: pmp-owner@pwg.org <br>
03/25/2005 09:14 AMTo<br>
"'Bergman, Ron'" <Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com>, "McDonald,
Ira"<br>
<imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, "Adams, Charles A"<br>
<charles.a.adams@office.xerox.com>, pmp@pwg.org<br>
cc<br>
Subject<br>
RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated
March<br>
21, 2005<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Hi Ron,<br>
<br>
Going all the way back to the first Microsoft draft and ever since,<br>
it's clear that the MS "port" entry has to have a separate device<br>
index for each port, because the 'hr...' status objects have to be<br>
separate for EACH port. <br>
<br>
Remember the main MS model is NOT an embedded printer. It's either
<br>
an external network adaptor or a spooler. In both of these cases,
<br>
only ONE protocol is being exposed fore each "port".<br>
<br>
This isn't a new restriction.<br>
<br>
In the case of an external network adaptor, each "port" is literally<br>
a different direct-connect printer.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
- Ira<br>
<br>
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)<br>
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc<br>
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839<br>
phone: +1-906-494-2434<br>
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Bergman, Ron [mailto:Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com]<br>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:03 PM<br>
To: McDonald, Ira; Adams, Charles A; pmp@pwg.org<br>
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft<br>
dated March 21, 2005<br>
<br>
<br>
Ira,<br>
<br>
Regarding your comment:<br>
<br>
2. ppmPortHrDeviceIndex - This seems to imply an hrDeviceTable entry is<br>
needed for each port on the system. Is this the expected behavior? <br>
Or is this just the hrDeviceIndex of the printer? <br>
Or is the the hrDeviceIndex for the network card?<br>
<br>
<ira> For the Microsoft tool (TCPMon), EACH port (channel)
has to<br>
have a separate 'hrDeviceIndex' - this is different than typical<br>
Printer MIB implementations, but it's a Microsoft tool limitation.<br>
Note that Microsoft TCPMon _only_ supports LPR and Raw ports (no<br>
other protocol is supported or contemplated according to co-editor<br>
Mike Fenelon from the Microsoft Longhorn printing team), so this<br>
only means two 'hrDeviceIndex' values at most (for each printer).<br>
</ira><br>
<br>
I do not recall ever hearing this. It certainly is not clear from<br>
the MIB text (see below) that this is the case. If this is true<br>
then it is not really hrDeviceIndex that is indicated but is just<br>
ppmPortIndex.<br>
<br>
Also, for the printers I work with there will be a minimum of 10<br>
ports reported. If IPP is enable, there will be a minimum of 15.<br>
The maximum number will be 192.<br>
<br>
Ron<br>
<br>
>From the MIB:<br>
ppmPortHrDeviceIndex OBJECT-TYPE<br>
SYNTAX Integer32 (0..2147483647)<br>
MAX-ACCESS read-only<br>
STATUS current<br>
DESCRIPTION<br>
"The value of 'hrDeviceIndex' in the IETF Host Resources MIB <br>
(RFC 1514/2790), to be used for status queries for this port if <br>
the value of 'ppmPortSnmpStatusQueryEnabled' is 'true'.<br>
<br>
If this object is zero, then monitoring applications MUST NOT <br>
attempt status queries for this port in the IETF Host Resources <br>
MIB (RFC 1514/2790) and/or IETF Printer MIB (RFC 1759/3805)."<br>
REFERENCE<br>
"hrDeviceStatus, hrPrinterStatus, hrPrinterDetectedErrorState i<br>
n IETF Host Resources MIB (RFC 1514/2790).<br>
prtChannelStatus in IETF Printer MIB (RFC 1759/3805)."<br>
DEFVAL { 0 }
-- no host device index<br>
::= { ppmPortEntry 7 }<br>
</tt></font>
<br>