attachment-0001

Bill, I think ALL standards participants can stand a regular healthy reminder about the 80/20 rule... how we should keep focused on standardizing well the 20% of objects,  elements or attributes that will provide 80% of the key interoprable function. Your findings, although not specific, do act as such a reminder. I have been urging in past Plenary and Steering Committee meetings that one of the most beneficial services the PWG can provide is further Printer MIB interop testing. In the absence of a firm commitment to achieve this your recommendation to mandate (for WIMS) only essential elements that are known to be well supported is a good one. ---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis IBM STSM Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group http://www.pwg.org IBM Printing Systems http://www.ibm.com/printers 303-924-5337 ---------------------------------------------- <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td width=40%>wamwagner@comcast.net Sent by: owner-wims@pwg.org 09/01/2005 06:37 PM <td width=59%> <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td> <div align=right>To</div> <td>"'wims@pwg.org'" <wims@pwg.org> <tr valign=top> <td> <div align=right>cc</div> <td> <tr valign=top> <td> <div align=right>Subject</div> <td>WIMS> Reflections on a (MIB) walk</table> <table> <tr valign=top> <td> <td></table> </table> I just had occasion to MIB walk through a few implementations of  a table or two in the printer MIB, in several standard products including some from the most predominant members of the industry. Remembering the discussion and consideration that went into the objects, it is an eye opener to see with what carelessness (or is it intentional sabotage) these things are implemented. Granted, looking at the  spec after all this time, there are some ambiguities. But it often looks like someone just thru in arbitrary values for some objects. "Mandatory" means nothing. Since most management applications use private mibs, manufacturers appear not to put any effort into validating the general MIB.Or else the objects are of so little use that no one cares if the values are valid.   Aside from being discouraging, I think there is a lesson here that we may apply to our on-going work. Keep things simple; don't expect that anyone cares if you label an element mandatory; if they have  a use for it,  it will be implemented. Let's not slavishly import things from the printer MIB or other sources, or even strive for completeness. The criteria for inclusion must be the clear need for the element as evidenced by existing use or indisputable future requirement.   As for having a Printer MIB 2 cook-off (a non-proprietary bake-off), getting  consistent implementations may be important to some people, but apparently not to manufacturers. I doubt anyone would come.   Bill Wagner