Hi Dennis,
The Introduction and Background were recently added, for boilerplate
reasons.
They are not authoritative and in fact have not been reviewed.
Microsoft is NOT using the Printer MIB for status at all in Longhorn (per
Mike
Fenelon). The 'hrDeviceTable' and 'hrPrinterTable' in the Host Resources
MIB
are the only status that will be displayed by Longhorn for printer ports.
If a vendor implements a single 'hrDeviceIndex' value for all ports (i.e.,
channels)
on the "same" printer, then if ANY port is 'down' in 'hrDeviceStatus' they
will ALL
be shown 'down' in the MS tools. That's not acceptable behaviour.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald at sharplabs.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Carney [mailto:dcarney at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 2:43 PM
To: pmp at pwg.org
Cc: Adams, Charles A; McDonald, Ira; 'Bergman, Ron';
mfenelon at windows.microsoft.com
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d
ated March 21, 2005
Ira, My reading of the "Introduction" and the "Background" of the document
seems to make it clear that the main MS model *IS* an embedded printer.
Mike Fenelon, is it really true that your port monitor makes it such that
each port *has to* have a different ppmPortHrDeviceIndex? If a network
printer implemented this MIB and advertised both an LPR and a RAW port,
would you really have a problem if both ports had a ppmPortHrDeviceIndex of
1?
Dennis
Inactive hide details for "McDonald, Ira" '
src="cid:10__=08BBE55CDFF522718f9e8a93df938 at us.ibm.com" width=16>"McDonald,
Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com>
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com>
Sent by: pmp-owner at pwg.org
03/25/2005 09:14 AM
To
"'Bergman, Ron'" <Ron.Bergman at rpsa.ricoh.com>, "McDonald, Ira"
<imcdonald at sharplabs.com>, "Adams, Charles A"
<charles.a.adams at office.xerox.com>, pmp at pwg.org
cc
Subject
RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March
21, 2005
Hi Ron,
Going all the way back to the first Microsoft draft and ever since,
it's clear that the MS "port" entry has to have a separate device
index for each port, because the 'hr...' status objects have to be
separate for EACH port.
Remember the main MS model is NOT an embedded printer. It's either
an external network adaptor or a spooler. In both of these cases,
only ONE protocol is being exposed fore each "port".
This isn't a new restriction.
In the case of an external network adaptor, each "port" is literally
a different direct-connect printer.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald at sharplabs.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bergman, Ron [ mailto:Ron.Bergman at rpsa.ricoh.com
<mailto:Ron.Bergman at rpsa.ricoh.com> ]
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:03 PM
To: McDonald, Ira; Adams, Charles A; pmp at pwg.org
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft
dated March 21, 2005
Ira,
Regarding your comment:
2. ppmPortHrDeviceIndex - This seems to imply an hrDeviceTable entry is
needed for each port on the system. Is this the expected behavior?
Or is this just the hrDeviceIndex of the printer?
Or is the the hrDeviceIndex for the network card?
<ira> For the Microsoft tool (TCPMon), EACH port (channel) has to
have a separate 'hrDeviceIndex' - this is different than typical
Printer MIB implementations, but it's a Microsoft tool limitation.
Note that Microsoft TCPMon _only_ supports LPR and Raw ports (no
other protocol is supported or contemplated according to co-editor
Mike Fenelon from the Microsoft Longhorn printing team), so this
only means two 'hrDeviceIndex' values at most (for each printer).
</ira>
I do not recall ever hearing this. It certainly is not clear from
the MIB text (see below) that this is the case. If this is true
then it is not really hrDeviceIndex that is indicated but is just
ppmPortIndex.
Also, for the printers I work with there will be a minimum of 10
ports reported. If IPP is enable, there will be a minimum of 15.
The maximum number will be 192.
Ron
>From the MIB:
ppmPortHrDeviceIndex OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX Integer32 (0..2147483647)
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The value of 'hrDeviceIndex' in the IETF Host Resources MIB
(RFC 1514/2790), to be used for status queries for this port if
the value of 'ppmPortSnmpStatusQueryEnabled' is 'true'.
If this object is zero, then monitoring applications MUST NOT
attempt status queries for this port in the IETF Host Resources
MIB (RFC 1514/2790) and/or IETF Printer MIB (RFC 1759/3805)."
REFERENCE
"hrDeviceStatus, hrPrinterStatus, hrPrinterDetectedErrorState i
n IETF Host Resources MIB (RFC 1514/2790).
prtChannelStatus in IETF Printer MIB (RFC 1759/3805)."
DEFVAL { 0 } -- no host device index
::= { ppmPortEntry 7 }
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pwg.org/archives/pmp/attachments/20050326/fdaa180b/attachment.html