Though the PWG may indeed view the issue as closed, there IS news that
justifies re-opening the issue -- the IETF requirements in RFC 2277,
published January 1998. The current Printer MIB draft does not comply with
those requirements. This proposal, as I understand it, brings the MIB into
minimal compliance with those requirements. If the IESG allows the Printer
MIB to progress along the standards track without meeting their basic
localization requirements, then why do they bother to publish such
requirements at all?
I, of course, am in favor of updating the draft one last time to incorporate
this proposal.
Thanks,
Angelo
-----Original Message-----
From: lpyoung@lexmark.com [SMTP:lpyoung@lexmark.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 1998 11:35 AM
To: pmp@pwg.org
Subject: Re: PMP> Last call Printer MIB comment: simple
localization proposal
Tom and Ira,
You guys are certainly tenacious on this issue. My opinion is
that this issue has been closed for some time and I do not
see any new news that would justify opening this issue again.
However if there are significant (close to unanimous) responses
from members of the working group by Thursday April 2nd (tomorrow)
stating that this issue and your proposal deserves a detailed review
then I will agree to extend the closure date. If I do not see a huge
rally in favor of this proposal (silence will be counted as being
against this proposal) then the closure date of Thursday April 2nd
will stand.
Regards,
Lloyd
------------------------------------------------------------
Lloyd Young Lexmark International, Inc.
Senior Program Manager Dept. C14L/Bldg. 035-3
Strategic Alliances 740 New Circle Road NW
internet: lpyoung@lexmark.com Lexington, KY 40550
Phone: (606) 232-5150 Fax: (606) 232-6740