RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft dated March 21, 2005

• Previous message: Dennis Carney: "RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March 21, 2005"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Dennis' comments seem to echo the concern I voiced last week. And I agree with Dennis that a unique
value of hrDeviceIndex is not needed for each service. I have also reviewed the document and do not find
any text that indicates the value of hrDeviceIndex cannot be the same for all services.
 
hrDeviceIndex references a "device" and should not be overloaded to also indicate a port within a device.
Although I cannot speak for all printers, in the implementations I am familiar with, it is very unlikely that
only an LPR port or a raw socket port is "down". If a port is disabled (per the configuration), as Dennis
stated, it will not be present in the MIB. The MIB should be essentially "Static" and only be modified by
a configuration change.
 
    Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org]On Behalf Of Dennis Carney
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 9:10 AM
To: pmp@pwg.org; McDonald, Ira
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March 21, 2005

Hi Ira,

I would have said that if specifically the LPR port is down for whatever reason, it wouldn't be listed in the MIB. This opinion was my first (intuitive) reaction, but it also does not seem to be wrong based on a quick reading of the document.

Is there a feeling among the people who have been working the most on this MIB that it is supposed to be "static"--have essentially hard-coded rows and values for a given printer model? If so, this should probably be made clear in the document.

Dennis Carney
IBM Printing Systems
Inactive hide details for "McDonald, Ira" ' src="cid:141164917@28032005-2019" width=16>"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>

        "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>

        03/27/2005 09:30 AM

To

Dennis Carney/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, pmp@pwg.org

cc

Subject

RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March 21, 2005
                 

Hi Dennis,

OK - I probably picked an unwise example.

If one software channel (LPR) is down, because the thread
crashed (or the operator took down the LPR service), then
EVERY software channel is going to show as down, on your
network printer (remember MS does NOT read Printer MIB).

You're conflating all hardware status with the software
status of channels/interpreters.

But you're welcome to decide this is 'normal' behavior.

Cheers,
- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Carney [ mailto:dcarney@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 4:37 PM
To: McDonald, Ira; pmp@pwg.org
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d
ated March 21, 2005

Hi Ira,

Ira wrote:
>If a vendor implements a single 'hrDeviceIndex' value for all ports (i.e.,
channels)
>on the "same" printer, then if ANY port is 'down' in 'hrDeviceStatus' they
will ALL
>be shown 'down' in the MS tools. That's not acceptable behaviour.

To me, that *does* seem like acceptable behavior (or if you'd prefer,
"behaviour"--is that your proximity to Canada showing? :-).

If I am a single network printer advertising both an LPR port and a RAW
port, if my one input tray is out of paper, then *both* ports *should* be in
an "out of paper" state in the host resources MIB.

If instead I want to differentiate between the two (I really can't think of
many good reasons to do this on a network printer), I can do this using two
different indices into the hr MIB. But I would have guessed that 99% of
network printers would simply have all advertised ports (correctly, IMHO)
point to the same hr MIB entry.

Dennis Carney
IBM Printing Systems
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>

"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
03/26/2005 09:12 AM

To
Dennis Carney/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, pmp@pwg.org

cc
"Adams, Charles A" <charles.a.adams@office.xerox.com>, "'Bergman, Ron'"
<Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com>, mfenelon@windows.microsoft.com

Subject
RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March
21, 2005

Hi Dennis,

The Introduction and Background were recently added, for boilerplate
reasons.
They are not authoritative and in fact have not been reviewed.

Microsoft is NOT using the Printer MIB for status at all in Longhorn (per
Mike
Fenelon). The 'hrDeviceTable' and 'hrPrinterTable' in the Host Resources MIB

are the only status that will be displayed by Longhorn for printer ports.

If a vendor implements a single 'hrDeviceIndex' value for all ports (i.e.,
channels)
on the "same" printer, then if ANY port is 'down' in 'hrDeviceStatus' they
will ALL
be shown 'down' in the MS tools. That's not acceptable behaviour.

Cheers,
- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Carney [ mailto:dcarney@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 2:43 PM
To: pmp@pwg.org
Cc: Adams, Charles A; McDonald, Ira; 'Bergman, Ron';
mfenelon@windows.microsoft.com
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d
ated March 21, 2005

Ira, My reading of the "Introduction" and the "Background" of the document
seems to make it clear that the main MS model *IS* an embedded printer.

Mike Fenelon, is it really true that your port monitor makes it such that
each port *has to* have a different ppmPortHrDeviceIndex? If a network
printer implemented this MIB and advertised both an LPR and a RAW port,
would you really have a problem if both ports had a ppmPortHrDeviceIndex of
1?

Dennis
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>

"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
Sent by: pmp-owner@pwg.org
03/25/2005 09:14 AMTo
"'Bergman, Ron'" <Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com>, "McDonald, Ira"
<imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, "Adams, Charles A"
<charles.a.adams@office.xerox.com>, pmp@pwg.org
cc
Subject
RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March
21, 2005

Hi Ron,

Going all the way back to the first Microsoft draft and ever since,
it's clear that the MS "port" entry has to have a separate device
index for each port, because the 'hr...' status objects have to be
separate for EACH port.

Remember the main MS model is NOT an embedded printer. It's either
an external network adaptor or a spooler. In both of these cases,
only ONE protocol is being exposed fore each "port".

This isn't a new restriction.

In the case of an external network adaptor, each "port" is literally
a different direct-connect printer.

Cheers,
- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Bergman, Ron [ mailto:Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:03 PM
To: McDonald, Ira; Adams, Charles A; pmp@pwg.org
Subject: RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft
dated March 21, 2005

Ira,

Regarding your comment:

2. ppmPortHrDeviceIndex - This seems to imply an hrDeviceTable entry is
needed for each port on the system. Is this the expected behavior?
Or is this just the hrDeviceIndex of the printer?
Or is the the hrDeviceIndex for the network card?

<ira> For the Microsoft tool (TCPMon), EACH port (channel) has to
have a separate 'hrDeviceIndex' - this is different than typical
Printer MIB implementations, but it's a Microsoft tool limitation.
Note that Microsoft TCPMon _only_ supports LPR and Raw ports (no
other protocol is supported or contemplated according to co-editor
Mike Fenelon from the Microsoft Longhorn printing team), so this
only means two 'hrDeviceIndex' values at most (for each printer).
</ira>

I do not recall ever hearing this. It certainly is not clear from
the MIB text (see below) that this is the case. If this is true
then it is not really hrDeviceIndex that is indicated but is just
ppmPortIndex.

Also, for the printers I work with there will be a minimum of 10
ports reported. If IPP is enable, there will be a minimum of 15.
The maximum number will be 192.

Ron

From the MIB:
ppmPortHrDeviceIndex OBJECT-TYPE
 SYNTAX Integer32 (0..2147483647)
 MAX-ACCESS read-only
 STATUS current
 DESCRIPTION
"The value of 'hrDeviceIndex' in the IETF Host Resources MIB
(RFC 1514/2790), to be used for status queries for this port if
the value of 'ppmPortSnmpStatusQueryEnabled' is 'true'.

If this object is zero, then monitoring applications MUST NOT
attempt status queries for this port in the IETF Host Resources
MIB (RFC 1514/2790) and/or IETF Printer MIB (RFC 1759/3805)."
 REFERENCE
"hrDeviceStatus, hrPrinterStatus, hrPrinterDetectedErrorState i
n IETF Host Resources MIB (RFC 1514/2790).
prtChannelStatus in IETF Printer MIB (RFC 1759/3805)."
 DEFVAL { 0 } -- no host device index
 ::= { ppmPortEntry 7 }

• Next message: McDonald, Ira: "RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March 21, 2005"
• Previous message: Dennis Carney: "RE: PMP> Comments on Printer Port Monitor MIB 1.0 working draft d ated March 21, 2005"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 28 2005 - 13:21:55 EST