Ron, according to DPA, you have a slight error in your table. If the
client submitted the job with the job-client-id set to some value, say
"foo", then the job-client-id column would have "foo" in each row. If
the client submitted the job without specifying job-client-id, the
server would set job-client-id to have the value of the job-identifier
(as assigned by the server). In this second case the table would be as
shown below, except that the value of job-client-id for row A would be
empty.
I have not been following the development of the job MIB closely, but I
do wonder if there is a need for all these identifiers? If the job MIB
is for servers, then perhaps so, but if it is for printers only, then
two identifiers seem sufficient:
1) a local identifier generated by the printer
2) an identifier from the submitter of the job.
>> If my present understanding of the DPA model is correct, then Tom's
> table (line number 296 of jmp-spec version 0.1) can be expanded to:
>> DPA |job-client-id|job-id-on-client|job-identifier|job-id-on-printer
> JMP |jobClientId |jobUpStreamId |jobCurrentId |jobDownStreamId
> ----|-------------|----------------|--------------|-----------------
> A | 123 | not applicable | unspecified | 123
> B | 123 | unspecified | 123 | 456
> C | 123 | 123 | 456 | 789
> D | 123 | 456 | 789 | not applicable
>> A = Client submitting job
> B = First downstream server
> C = Second downstream server
> D = Printing device
>>