> I would like to propose the following alternative to the new
> prtAlertTableChanges object. This alternative requires no new objects
> and is fairly simple to implement.
I like your approach to solving the problem without having to add
another MIB object. However, considering the responses from some
of the other printer vendors, we're back to the situation where
a mgmt app needs a simple, low-cost (for both the app *and* the
printer!) method to determine if at least a change has been made
to the Alert Table to the addition/removal of a critical alert.
Binnur sums it up pretty well with:
> I have talked to few people around here.. The feeling is that the number
> of alerts generated is printer implementation depended.. It could range
> from an almost stream to only a few alerts.. So, the engineers around
> here would like to have some what deterministic way of picking up new
> alerts.. They feel implementing a counter that gets incremented every
> time a warning or critical error occurs would be satisfactory..
Angelo, does this extra MIB object present Xerox with a major problem
(other than adding yet another MIB object)?