I agree that this issue should be considered and I also propose that this
be discussed in Maui within the PMP status slot.
Also, I would like to explore the possiblity of the bits in
hrPrinterDetectedErrorState be treated as enums, in that new bits can be
defined without a change to the original document. In this manner the
Printer MIB document can add new definitions independent of the hrMIB and
the bits are still all contained in the same object (i.e.
hrPrinterDetectedErrorState). I am sure this proposal will stir up some
interesting responses, but we should determine if this has any advantages
for the PWG.
On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Harry Lewis wrote:
> Back in Boulder, I had a proposal ready to discuss (and had circulated it on
> the reflector) to move any hr MIB extensions into the printer MIB, itself. I
> would like this to be considered option (3) in addition to the two Lloyd has
> Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems
> firstname.lastname@example.org on 01/08/98 06:45:43 AM
> Please respond to email@example.com @ internet
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org @ internet
> Subject: PMP> Status
> Ron described the IETF process as being a black hole and I
> think this description is quite accurate. The status of the
> Printer MIB has not changed from previous reports. The Host
> Resources MIB working group is moving forward at what I consider
> a snail's pace. Chris sent e-mail to Harald and Keith back in
> early December and again last week telling them that the Printer
> MIB Working Group has done everything that to move this MIB to
> Draft Standard but were being held up by other things outside of
> our control and asking for their assistance. So far we have not
> heard anything from either e-mail. There is not much else that
> Chris or I know to do to get this thing moving forward any faster.
> As I see it we have two alternatives:
> 1. Continue on present course. Wait for the Host Resources MIB
> to go to Draft Standard. No estimate on completion date.
> 2. Take current Printer MIB draft to Proposed Standard. This can be
> submitted in a matter of days.
> With alternative 2, we could decide at some future date (after HR
> MIB gets to Draft Standard) whether to take the Printer MIB on to
> Draft Standard or not.
> My opinion is that alternative 2 is the best one to pursue.
> I will not be present at the PWG meeting in Hawaii so discussion
> on this topic is best done via the mailing list.
> Lloyd Young Lexmark International, Inc.
> Senior Program Manager Dept. C14L/Bldg. 035-3
> Strategic Alliances 740 New Circle Road NW
> internet: email@example.com Lexington, KY 40550
> Phone: (606) 232-5150 Fax: (606) 232-6740