I appreciate the recent comments from Jay. I know how difficult it is these
days for the same basic set of folks to follow all the PWG activities!
I will be no surprise to any of you that I herald and support Jay's plea for a
"simple" Job MIB . I do think we have made much progress in the recent weeks
and now we're focusing mainly on the dispute over
Job State Table and number of attributes... so we're getting somewhere... but
I'd certainly like to close
faster than we are.
One comment Jay made was:
>Another key question we've danced around over the years is how closely
>is the Printer MIB related to the Job MIB?
>Didn't we come to the consensus where an agent supporting the Job MIB
>did not necessarily have support for the Printer MIB? That is, there
>should no binding between the Job MIB and the Printer MIB. Do I have
>that right?
I would like to say that the only reason we even broached this topic is
due to the "Job MIB in the SERVER" model. Why would a printer ever go so
far as to implement an SNMP agent to do a Job MIB but not implement the
printer MIB as well? So I really don't support the notion of totally
uncoupling the MIBs when, for printer implementations, it makes
greater sense to allow this association. Am I wrong about why we wanted
to uncouple?
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems