> Chris,
>
> My curiosity is particularly piqued by your comment
> " At the moment, it appears that traps were used to lock a given
> printer into a given management application, and to lock out other
> printers. This is referred to as "using SNMP to provide open,
> standard, proprietary solutions." This is exactly the kind of thing
> we are trying to prove that we did not do. "
>
> That most certainly was not the intention of trap implementations done
> by DPI. Do you have some specific information on such a use?
I am not sure what you mean by "specific information" since I
thought I had cited a specific example.
The person who coined that phrase is Bobby Krupczak of Empire
Technologies -- rdk@empiretech.com This was based on his
experience of installing and setting up multiple networks and
configuring SNMP managers, agents, etc. I don't think that he
could give you specific information because he is under
Non-Disclosure (as I am), however, he could describe the general
problem. The problem has also been discussed in Communications
Week and Network Computing, and Steve Waldbusser (the former
advisor to this group) gave an interview where it was alluded to
again. I hope this helps.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--==--==--==- Chris Wellens
==--==--==--= Email: chrisw@iwl.com Web: http://www.iwl.com/
--==--==--==- InterWorking Labs, Inc. 244 Santa Cruz Ave, Aptos, CA 95003
==--==--==--= Tel: +1 408 685 3190 Fax: +1 408 662 9065
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------