JK Martin wrote:
> Early on, when plans started to firm up for this 2nd interop test,
> I thought I had asked quite clearly that the PWG define a set of
> very common alert situations, then specify which types of alerts
> should be generated for those situations. That way a management
> application could have half a chance at deriving consistent semantics
> across different implementations.
It may not be as robust as Jay intended, but a few days ago, I posted
our alert table with associated status and state information to
try and assist in this process. In case the post was missed, it's at
pub/pwg/pmp/snmpmib/alerts/ibmalrts
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems