Ira,
Base on my experience with ENAs, they do not provide a feature to
disable an output port unless the printer is removed. Normally,
this is to replace a worn-out unit or upgrade a printer.
In this case the old printer is gone forever. So how does your
"STATIC entries" handle this situation?
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: McDonald, Ira [mailto:imcdonald@sharplabs.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:38 AM
To: Bergman, Ron; McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); pmp@pwg.org
Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
Hi Ron,
Based on previous IPP experience, it will take MONTHS to add one
new enum to the PrtChannelTypeTC with IANA - that would stop the
Port Mon MIB dead in its tracks until it was accepted by IANA.
About ppmPrinterEnabled - same rationale as ppmPortEnabled - keeps
the number of Printer entries STATIC in an implementation - lets
the user see that the one Printer (i.e., hardward output interface)
on an External Network Adapter should presently be ignored.
Remember that the Port Mon MIB MUST NOT depend on either Host
Resources or Printer MIB, by common concensus - it may only
AUGMENT them, if they are present.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bergman, Ron [mailto:Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:40 PM
> To: McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); pmp@pwg.org
> Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
>
>
> Ira,
>
> I am not sure what value ppmPrinterEnabled adds to the MIB.
> This appears to be analogous to
> On Line/Off Line. If I want to create a driver for the
> printer I don't care what the current
> state is. That information is only necessary when I am ready
> to print and then this MIB is
> not used.
>
> I believe that Bert has a valid point in using
> ppmPortProtocolType. It is not a major effort
> to add unknown(2) to the IANA registrations.
>
> Otherwise, the changes are inline with our discussions
> following the test.
>
> Ron
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org]On Behalf
> Of McDonald,
> Ira
> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:46 AM
> To: 'Wijnen, Bert (Bert)'; McDonald, Ira; 'pmp@pwg.org'
> Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
>
>
> Hi Bert,
>
> Thanks for your quick feedback. My replies inline below.
>
> Cheers,
> - Ira
>
>
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
> PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
> phone: +1-906-494-2434
> email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:08 AM
> > To: McDonald, Ira; 'pmp@pwg.org'
> > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July 2005)
> >
> >
> > Only did a very very quick scan.
> >
> > Comments.
> >
> > - ppmPortProtocolTargetPort OBJECT-TYPE
> > SYNTAX Integer32 (0..65535)
> > I propose that you use InetPortNumber TC from RFC4001
> >
>
> Won't work, because this port is not limited to Internet Suite
> protocols. The 'service:' URI in ppmPortServiceNameOrURI may
> also be for non-Internet suites (AppleTalk, NetWare, etc.).
>
> I'll correct the DESCRIPTION in the MIB and make clear that
> (as with the Printer MIB) ports/channels may be from multiple
> protocol suites.
>
>
> > - ppmPortProtocolType OBJECT-TYPE
> > SYNTAX Integer32 (0..2147483647)
> >
> > WHy not use TC PrtChannelTypeTC as the SYNTAX?
> > I do see that you want to use zero (meaning not supported).
> > But maybe better is to use none(1) in that case, or maybe
> > adding an enumeration to the TC of notSupported(xx) ??
> > It is now an IANA-maintained TC, so it should not be that
> > difficult to get a label added.
> >
>
> Won't work. PrtChannelTypeTC currently only defines 'other(1)'
> and (foolishly) does NOT define 'unknown(2)' (unlike every other
> textual convention in the Printer MIB). Because the Printer MIB
> v2 still doesn't define DEFVAL clauses for most objects, this
> oversight has not surfaced before. We could register 'unknown(2)'
> with IANA, but _not_ fast enough (because this MIB's going into OS
> and printer vendor products right now).
>
>
> > - ppmPortPrtChannelIndex has a reference to RFC1213, while I
> > think I would reather reference RFC2863 (the current IF-MIB)
> >
> > Bert
> >
>
> Agreed. My mistake from the old Printer MIB (RFC 1759).
>
> I'll correct the references in the MIB.
> - Ira
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 21 2005 - 20:26:11 EDT