PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Last Call Observations [question about 'broken'

PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Last Call Observations [question about 'broken'

Re: PMP> Last Call Observations [question about 'broken'

Tom Hastings (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Thu, 2 Apr 1998 14:20:29 PST

A Xerox implementor was asking me today about the subunit status bits
that the Appendix E says should indicate "Unavailable because Broken"
with is a code of 3 in the prtInputSubunitStatus.

This code is indicated for the printer states: Jam, Cover/Door Open,
Input Tray Missing, Output Tray Missing, Output Tray Full, Marker Supply
Missing, Marker Supply Empty.

We were wondering why we didn't use "Unavailable and OnRequest"
which is a code of 1 for something that requires human attention, but
is not broken? See 2.2.13.2.2. The end of section 2.2.13.2.2 does
give the example of input tray jammed and indicates that unvailable
because broken (3) is to be used.

Thanks,
Tom

When a tray is actually

At 13:59 04/02/1998 PST, Harry Lewis wrote:
>I guess I've been so delighted with finally getting the HR MIB updated that
>I've fallen asleep at the switch on a couple resulting changes to the Printer
>MIB. Somehow, I can't make my way to the PWG ftp server right now, so I don't
>have a text copy of the latest version of the MIB to actual edit these
changes
>into, but I want to get my observations out on the wire ASAP since last
call is
>close to finishing.
>
>1. There are two places in the printer MIB which should undergo editorial
>change based on acceptance of the hrPrinterDetectedErrorState changes by HR
>MIB.
>
> a. Printer MIB section 2.2.13.2.1 (Host Resources MIB Printer Status)
>should have the explanation of hrPrinterDetectedErrorState bits expanded to
>reflect the changes to the HR MIB.
> b. The "Top 25" table (Appendix E - Overall Printer Status Table)
>should be updated to reflect these new bits, also.
>
>2. My other observation is that, I thought we had agreed the "Top 25"
table was
>practically useless as presented in Appendix E text and there was a
motion, at
>least, to remove the text and insert a pointer to the actual LANDSCAPE
document
>on the PWG server. I still feel this would benefit anyone trying to use this
>information.
>
>3. Upon closer examination of the "Top 25" table, I believe some information
>was dropped in the migration from source landscape document to "squozen"
text.
>Looking at the PDF version, anyway, there are two sentences inserted into the
>table, if you will, one that distinguishes Critical Errors and one for
>Non-critical. I can't determine how this information mapped to the text
>version. It appears it may have just fallen out. Again, rather than try to
>patch this, I'd prefer a pointer to the landscape PDF.
>
>I will be happy to edit these changes... or supply Randy or whoever with more
>detailed information. I just wanted to get these "last call" comments on the
>wire ASAP! Now I can be counted as another one who came out from under the
>rocks during last call ;-)
>
>
>Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems
>
>