PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Understanding RFC 1759 and the new enums (and the PMP

PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Understanding RFC 1759 and the new enums (and the PMP

Re: PMP> Understanding RFC 1759 and the new enums (and the PMP

Tom Hastings (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Fri, 21 Mar 1997 17:05:35 PST

At 13:49 03/20/97 PST, Gail Songer wrote:
>Tom,
>
>I am currently having Eugene look at it to make sure that I have not make any
>gross mistakes, and I should be sending it off today. I assume that it should
>not be too long before it gets put on the PWG web page.
>
>What do you mean by "how and where to get the new enums"? do you mean the
>links to the current draft or do you want something more specific? I have
>attached the current version of the faq. Would you let me know if it is
>sufficient?
>
>Thanks!
>Gail
>

Gail,

I have a few comments on your FAQ about what the changes are.

1. Should we add all the new objects to the list? If so, then add:
the administratively assigned printer name object, start-up and banner page
control objects, manual feed and input tray switching objects to the list.

2. Provide some way for a user to access the current draft of the
new Printer MIB. Either the latest Internet-draft, or the latest
internal PWG draft. I'm not sure which is the best source to get
the latest approved enums. But maybe it is safer to refer to the
latest Internet-Draft. But I'm not sure how to give such a pointer.

So either a URL or a file-name. I'm open to suggestions and haven't
proposed a specific method below. But I think a separate question
and answer would be good: How do I get the latest draft? Or more simply
just put in a link into the description.

3. Actually, it isn't that the PWG agreed that additional enums could
be used with RFC 1759, RFC 1759 says that the PWG can agree to additional
enums.

4. We need to say something that all the enums are now defined as
textual conventions, for ease of importing into an implementation.
The textual conventions are what is to be found in the Internet-Draft.

Thanks so much for doing this FAQ.

Tom

Here is your current text followed by my suggestions incorporated into the text.

<BR>
</FONT>
<BR>
<A NAME="Q3"> <B>3) What kind of changes are going into the new version?
</B></A> <BR><BR> <FONT SIZE=2>
Besides some general cleanup and expanded object definitions, the newest
version includes a couple of new variables. They includes a printer serial
number, and a count of the number of critical errors that have been put in
the alert table.
<BR><BR>
The new version also includes additional possible values for many of the
enumerations found within the specification. The members of PMP have agreed
that current implementations may use the textual conventions found in the
current draft and still be compliant to RFC1759. So if you want to describe
the fuser in the supply table, you can use the enumeration for fuser in
prtMarkerSuppliesType which has been included in the latest draft but was
not in RFC1759, and still be compliant with RFC1759.

Here is my suggested text for your FAQ:

<BR>
</FONT>
<BR>
<A NAME="Q3"> <B>3) What kind of changes are going into the new version?
</B></A> <BR><BR> <FONT SIZE=2>
Besides some general cleanup and expanded object definitions, the newest
version includes a couple of new variables. They include a printer serial
number, and a count of the number of critical errors that have been put in
the alert table, the administratively assigned printer name, start-up and
banner page control objects and manual feed and input tray switching objects.
<BR><BR>
The new version also includes additional possible values for many of the
enumerations found within the specification. RFC1759 specifies that
additional enums, called type 2 enums, may be used with RFC1759 compliant
implementations after approval by the PMP. There are a number of additional
enums that have been approved by the PMP since RFC1759 was published. Those
additional enums are published in the latest draft. So if you want to
describe the fuser in the supply table, you can use the enumeration for
fuser in prtMarkerSuppliesType which has been included in the latest draft
but was not in RFC1759, and still be compliant with RFC1759.

<BR>
</FONT>
<BR>
<A NAME="Q3"> <B>4) How do I get the latest version? </B></A> <BR><BR>
<FONT SIZE=2>
Point your browser at