attachment-0001

So the list of operations I currently have is Disable Enable Pause Resume Activate Purge Reset PowerOff GetAttributes SetAttributes GetResource SetResource Register Unregister We are still toying with the concept of an "Execute" for extensibility if nothing else (right?) And this current thread is about adding GetSchedule, SendReport, and SendNotification (or SendAlert) Right? Should we be considering Schedule as a Resource (GetResource vs Get Schedule)? Is a report really GetAttributes? ---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group http://www.pwg.org IBM Printing Systems http://www.ibm.com/printers 303-924-5337 ---------------------------------------------- <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td width=40%>"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com> Sent by: owner-wbmm@pwg.org 09/05/2003 10:12 AM <td width=59%> <table width=100%> <tr> <td> <div align=right>To</div> <td valign=top>"'Wagner,William'" <WWagner@NetSilicon.com>, "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, wbmm@pwg.org <tr> <td> <div align=right>cc</div> <td valign=top> <tr> <td> <div align=right>Subject</div> <td valign=top>RE: WBMM> Operations</table> <table> <tr valign=top> <td> <td></table> </table> <tt>Hi Bill, IPP "SendNotification" is used for Printer alerts (not just Job notifications).  If we keep both, then the PWG Semantic Model has to model them both and clarify when to use one or the other. And if a "routine" notification is sent to a WBMM Manager, then it's not properly an alert (an exception notification), right? Cheers, - Ira -----Original Message----- From: Wagner,William [mailto:WWagner@NetSilicon.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 10:19 AM To: McDonald, Ira; wbmm@pwg.org Subject: RE: WBMM> Operations Ira, I  toyed with  both "accept'  and  "Send".   I guess I left it thinking of these  as commands,  with  the  result  indicated. I have  no  problem with the  "SendReport".  approach and agree that it is better. I still think that the  WBMM "SendAlert" is, at most, a special case of the more general "SendNotification"  both in content and use (I could not see a WBMM Managment Application being notified  when a job was done, let alone when each page drops). Although there  may be some similarity, I think it better to preserve a name distinction. Bill Wagner -----Original Message----- From: McDonald, Ira [mailto:imcdonald@sharplabs.com] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 1:36 PM To: Wagner,William; wbmm@pwg.org Subject: RE: WBMM> Operations Hi Bill, Comments about your operation names: (1) 'GetSchedule' is fine. (2) 'AcceptReport' I don't like - the verb should describe the action    of the Sender - I suggest (following IPP Notifications) we use    'SendReport'. (3) 'AcceptAlert' - same comment - I suggest 'SendAlert' or (closer    to IPP Notifications) 'SendNotification'. Cheers, - Ira McDonald  High North Inc PS - I actually _am_ working on XML schema for a Schedule object and an Action object (row in a schedule).  I'm looking at the very mature IETF Schedule MIB (RFC 3231, October 2002, which obsoletes RFC 2591): "Abstract   This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)   for use with network management protocols in the Internet community.   In particular, it describes a set of managed objects that are used to   schedule management operations periodically or at specified dates and   times." -----Original Message----- From: Wagner,William [mailto:WWagner@NetSilicon.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 1:37 PM To: wbmm@pwg.org Subject: WBMM> Operations Ira, Considering what  I  was calling  the "connections" as the  initial operations requested in the  Post by  the  managed  object, these operations  would  be called; Get  Schedule  (arguments  include  ID  of  device  or proxy  [which represents  a  group  of  devices]) (Accept) Periodic report (Accept) Alert Report  (notification) The schedule  would  consist  of  one  or  more of  what we have been previously calling  operation  requests  (e.g.,  get  element), qualified by time,  condition and (to accommodate  proxies)  actual  managed  object ID.  The time could be immediate,  in which  case  you  would have the exchange:     Managed Object Manager Open connection or  send initial mail  message                                ----------------------Get Schedule------------------------------>                              <----Schedule  (get-element X, device y, immediate)---                                    -----Accept  Report  (element X value, device y)--------->                              <---------------------------Report Accepted------------------------                               ----------------------Get Schedule------------------------------>                               <-------Schedule (send next Get  Schedule [time], end)----- close connection  or  cease POP polling Perhaps  we  could also  allow that  a Schedule can be the response  to  an Accept  Report. That would simplify an exchange to: Managed Object Manager                                ----------------------Get Schedule------------------------------>                              <----Schedule  (get-element X, device y, immediate)---                                    -----Accept  Report  (element X value, device y)--------->                              <----Schedule  (get-element Z, device y, immediate)---                                    -----Accept  Report  (element X value, device y)--------->                                                       <-------Schedule (send next Get  Schedule [time], end)----- I   am uncertain  if  we  can represent  the  operation  commands contained within the Get  Schedule  operation response in the same was as  the  Get Schedule, Accept  Report and Accept Alert operations. Bill  Wagner </tt>