Regarding printer model identification, Randy wrote...
>In short, OIDs are definitely the way to go, and if its possible,
>I would like to see a single device registry also; except, not just
>for printers....I would like to see the industry as a whole have a
>way to translate hrDeviceIDs to actual product strings for all of
>their devices. I could still do it with vendor specific device OID
>trees, it would just take a little more time.
Guess I'd be surprised if most enterprises don't already have
device ID registries. Show of hands?
>>Besides, I would hate to see the domain of the hrDeviceID problem
>get splintered off into so many different device class registries,
>all located in different places, managed by different entities, with
>different rules and policies.
In one sense, Jay and David expressed advantage for OIDs in the
enterprise tree 'cause, even if a brand new model were added, existing
software would still be able to distinguish among devices to the
"vendor" level.
On the other hand, it will tend to organized differently within each
private enterprise sub-tree.
>>I think we should adopt a strategy of using OIDs to uniquely identify
>product models and approach the IETF or other working groups
>(possibly at the next network management open area meeting in
>December) about establish such a singular hrDeviceID registry.
>
Maybe this registry should contain enterprise OIDs - best of both worlds?
>Just my $0.02
>>Randy
Randy, if you keep adding your $.02 like this, soon, we're gonna owe
you a coffee!
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems