I agree this is the best approach due to the pre-existing (high) level of
interoperability.
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
----------------------------------------------
Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
11/12/2001 08:08 AM
To: schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
cc: bwijnen@lucent.com, Ron.Bergman@Hitachi-hkis.com, dbh@enterasys.com,
bwijnen@lucent.com, imcdonald@sharplabs.com, Harry
Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, rcasterline@crt.xerox.com, pmp@pwg.org,
paf@cisco.com, ned.freed@mrochek.com
Subject: Re: Print MIB 09
>>>>> Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:
Juergen> Another option that just came to my mind would be to
Juergen> introduce a new accessible-for-notify object which holds the
Juergen> prtAlertIndex value for a given notification and replaces
Juergen> prtAlertIndex in the printerV2Alert notification.
Sorry, this does not work as the new object would have a different
OID. So forget about it.
So I go back to my original position: Keep the notification as it is.
Add a comment saying that the notification definition does not
strictly comply to SMIv2 rules and that a proper fix (deprecating the
notification and definition of a new notification) is considered too
costly since fielded implementations interoperate just fine with the
current definition.
/js
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 12 2001 - 12:01:39 EST