Hi Ron,
If the Printer entry is deleted when an ENA interface
is disconnected, then all the subordinate Port entries
MUST be deleted too (because they are indexed by the
object ppmPrinterIndex). This is ugly if the local
printer is promptly plugged _back_ into the interface.
If the Printer entry is left in place but _not_ clearly
marked 'disabled', then ppmPrinterIEEE1284DeviceId,
ppmPrinterHrDeviceIndex and all the other Printer
columnar objects must be reset (to default values).
That's why the ppmPrinterEnabled object should be kept.
The WG concensus was strong that ppmPortEnabled was
required to keep the port list static (fixed number
of ports for an interface). Therefore, I added the
ppmPrinterEnabled object.
If others want ppmPrinterEnabled removed, would they
please speak up soon?
Cheers,
- Ira
PS - Remember that this MIB is supposed to work for
Network Spoolers too, where the concept of 'the printer
is removed' is fuzzy. The 'printer' is just some
configured downstream network printer that may well
be administratively disabled _without_ removing the
configuration at the Network Spooler.
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]
> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:24 PM
> To: McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); pmp at pwg.org> Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
>>> Ira,
>> Base on my experience with ENAs, they do not provide a feature to
> disable an output port unless the printer is removed. Normally,
> this is to replace a worn-out unit or upgrade a printer.
> In this case the old printer is gone forever. So how does your
> "STATIC entries" handle this situation?
>> Ron
>> -----Original Message-----
> From: McDonald, Ira [mailto:imcdonald at sharplabs.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:38 AM
> To: Bergman, Ron; McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); pmp at pwg.org> Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
>>> Hi Ron,
>> Based on previous IPP experience, it will take MONTHS to add one
> new enum to the PrtChannelTypeTC with IANA - that would stop the
> Port Mon MIB dead in its tracks until it was accepted by IANA.
>> About ppmPrinterEnabled - same rationale as ppmPortEnabled - keeps
> the number of Printer entries STATIC in an implementation - lets
> the user see that the one Printer (i.e., hardward output interface)
> on an External Network Adapter should presently be ignored.
>> Remember that the Port Mon MIB MUST NOT depend on either Host
> Resources or Printer MIB, by common concensus - it may only
> AUGMENT them, if they are present.
>> 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]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:40 PM
> > To: McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); pmp at pwg.org> > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
> >
> >
> > Ira,
> >
> > I am not sure what value ppmPrinterEnabled adds to the MIB.
> > This appears to be analogous to
> > On Line/Off Line. If I want to create a driver for the
> > printer I don't care what the current
> > state is. That information is only necessary when I am ready
> > to print and then this MIB is
> > not used.
> >
> > I believe that Bert has a valid point in using
> > ppmPortProtocolType. It is not a major effort
> > to add unknown(2) to the IANA registrations.
> >
> > Otherwise, the changes are inline with our discussions
> > following the test.
> >
> > Ron
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pmp-owner at pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner at pwg.org]On Behalf
> > Of McDonald,
> > Ira
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:46 AM
> > To: 'Wijnen, Bert (Bert)'; McDonald, Ira; 'pmp at pwg.org'
> > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
> >
> >
> > Hi Bert,
> >
> > Thanks for your quick feedback. My replies inline below.
> >
> > 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: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen at lucent.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:08 AM
> > > To: McDonald, Ira; 'pmp at pwg.org'
> > > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
> > >
> > >
> > > Only did a very very quick scan.
> > >
> > > Comments.
> > >
> > > - ppmPortProtocolTargetPort OBJECT-TYPE
> > > SYNTAX Integer32 (0..65535)
> > > I propose that you use InetPortNumber TC from RFC4001
> > >
> >
> > Won't work, because this port is not limited to Internet Suite
> > protocols. The 'service:' URI in ppmPortServiceNameOrURI may
> > also be for non-Internet suites (AppleTalk, NetWare, etc.).
> >
> > I'll correct the DESCRIPTION in the MIB and make clear that
> > (as with the Printer MIB) ports/channels may be from multiple
> > protocol suites.
> >
> >
> > > - ppmPortProtocolType OBJECT-TYPE
> > > SYNTAX Integer32 (0..2147483647)
> > >
> > > WHy not use TC PrtChannelTypeTC as the SYNTAX?
> > > I do see that you want to use zero (meaning not supported).
> > > But maybe better is to use none(1) in that case, or maybe
> > > adding an enumeration to the TC of notSupported(xx) ??
> > > It is now an IANA-maintained TC, so it should not be that
> > > difficult to get a label added.
> > >
> >
> > Won't work. PrtChannelTypeTC currently only defines 'other(1)'
> > and (foolishly) does NOT define 'unknown(2)' (unlike every other
> > textual convention in the Printer MIB). Because the Printer MIB
> > v2 still doesn't define DEFVAL clauses for most objects, this
> > oversight has not surfaced before. We could register 'unknown(2)'
> > with IANA, but _not_ fast enough (because this MIB's going into OS
> > and printer vendor products right now).
> >
> >
> > > - ppmPortPrtChannelIndex has a reference to RFC1213, while I
> > > think I would reather reference RFC2863 (the current IF-MIB)
> > >
> > > Bert
> > >
> >
> > Agreed. My mistake from the old Printer MIB (RFC 1759).
> >
> > I'll correct the references in the MIB.
> > - Ira
> >
>