IPP> PMP> Re: JMP> JobStateValue

IPP> PMP> Re: JMP> JobStateValue

IPP> PMP> Re: JMP> JobStateValue

Harry Lewis harryl at us.ibm.com
Fri May 9 12:04:50 EDT 1997


Jay Martin wrote (to the JMP group)


>One question that we all must come to grips with:


>  If a vendor wants to create a product used to monitor jobs,
>  will the choice of access be SNMP and the Job MIB, or IPP?


>We are, after all, in the process of trying to solve the very same problem
>in two completely different ways...at least when it comes to job status.


>This doesn't feel good.


Thank you, Jay! I've tried to point this out several times in the past.
The PWG is not working together in this vein. IPP has taken an all
encompassing approach, basically ignoring the fact that printer
configuration and status can be handled via the printer MIB - a standard
which is already implemented in at least 6 vendors printers and has the
support of several printer management software products.


IPP as a standard job submission protocol is a great idea. I guess there
is nothing wrong with also making it an all encompassing status and
configuration protocol... but, at least, we should be doing some sort
of mapping back to the Printer and Job MIBs.


Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems



More information about the Ipp mailing list