PMP> Draft MIB comments

[Bergman, Ron]

Hi Tom,

Good questions.  See my responses in-line.

	Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: pmp-owner at pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner at pwg.org]On Behalf Of Haapanen,
Tom
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 5:39 PM
To: pmp at pwg.org
Subject: PMP> Draft MIB comments


Everyone,

Here is my initial set of comments on the draft Print Port Monitor MIB.
This is based largely on our experience of developing port monitors (and
equivalent modules on other platforms) to communicate with a myriad of
devices.

So, in no particular order ...

- Shouldn't the ppmPortTable include a URI object for IPP printers?
Otherwise there is no way to know how to connect to an IPP device.  What
about SMB share names or AppleTalk names?

<Ron> The scope was limited to LPR and TCP Sockets since those were the
      protocols in Microsoft's request. Although, in our discussions it
      was agreed that it should be open to all protocols. IPP could be
      reported in the ppmPortProtocolType and the ppmPortProtocolPortNumber
      containing the port used.  In discussions, Microsoft did not see a
      a need so it was not described as a possibility.

      The SMB and AppleTalk names are normally broadcast so I am not sure
      why they would be needed, especially since they are now being used
      less and less.  Using the ppmPortLprQueueName (with a rename) would
      allow support of these protocols.  If you feel strongly about these
      a simple modification and rewrite of the descriptions would provide
      the support.

- For LPR devices, I would like to see an object that specifies whether the
device accept source ports outside the RFC range.  Most devices, but not
all, do today, and this can really help throughput with small documents.

<Ron> Are there printers that do not support any source port?  If no,
      this would be a good additional MIB object.

- What would be the expected behaviour if there are multiple ports of the
same type?  For example, Fiery controllers typically have three LPR queues
-- would it not be beneficial to be able to publish all three, and to
describe their behaviour?

<Ron> There is no limit to the number of ports or queues that can be
      reported in the MIB.  It is an SNMP table and supports large
      number of entries.  I assume the Fiery controller LPR queues
      each have a unique name.

Tom