At 08:45 09/27/96 PDT, JK Martin wrote:
...
>>Before making a couple of comments, I should mention that perhaps I am
>not quite up to speed on the latest draft for the MIB objects. Do you
>think you could post a pointer to the path of the file (on the ftp server)
>that contains the latest draft?
Here is the location of the latest Job Monitoring MIB that I send out
one week before the August meeting. The location is in the usual
directory for JMP, namely:
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/snmpmib/jobs-mib/
-rw-r--r-- 1 pwg pwg 186368 Aug 22 23:30 jmp-spec.doc
-rw-r--r-- 1 pwg pwg 621572 Aug 22 23:37 jmp-spec.psr
Tom
>Return-Path: <pwg-owner at pwg.org>
>X-Sender: hastings at zazen (Unverified)
>Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 16:44:39 PDT
>To: pwg at pwg.org>From: Tom Hastings <hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com>
>Subject: Updated Job Monitoring MIB/MIF objects/attributes
>Sender: owner-pwg at pwg.org>>Job Monitoring Project partipants,
>>I've updated the specification of the job monitoring MIB/MIF objects/attributes
>with the agreements we reached at the JMP July meeting in Portand.
>>The .psr has the revision marks as does the .doc file. We will use the
>document with revision marks ar the upcomping August meeting to continue
>the review. Revision marks show the agreements reached at the July meeting
>where we only had time to get through the 13 Job Identification objects that
>the first 3 Job Parameters. I've indicated ISSUES in the text that we have
>identified as issued but have not resolved. I've also copied in
>map-summ.doc into this document so we can more easily compare the Job
>Monitoring objects with the job submission protocols and keep the object
>names updated in that summary.
>>-rw-r--r-- 1 pwg pwg 186368 Aug 22 23:30 jmp-spec.doc
>-rw-r--r-- 1 pwg pwg 621572 Aug 22 23:37 jmp-spec.psr
>>Tom
>>>