This will confuse the IETF secretariat a lot. I had the same problem
with the Job Monitoring MIB.
Tom
At 14:15 10/24/1997 PDT, Scott Isaacson wrote:
>I posted a new version of the model document. I will be sending this
>to the IETF (not for final call for comments, just as yet another version
>of the document).
>
>As usual:
>
>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/
>
>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/ipp-model-971021-rev.pdf
>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/ipp-model-971021-rev.rtf
>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/ipp-model-971021.pdf
>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/ipp-model-971021.rtf
>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/ipp-model-971021.txt
>
>Please use
>
>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/ipp-model-971021.pdf
>
>for all comments (no rev marks, line numbers)
>
>I forgot to change the internal date - still says 10/14/97 even though the
>filename is 971021.
>
>Scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>