Could someone please explain on what basis the Job MIB charter was reje=
cted by
the IETF? Is the IETF, in general, forcing all new MIB definitions to b=
e
informational, only? If not, why have they singled out the Job MIB for =
this
type of treatment?
I am afraid that the IETF may have rejected the job MIB, out of hand, =
because
the Printer MIB's original charter prohibited working on Jobs, Fonts et=
c...
This was intentional, to limit our scope (AT THE TIME) so we could get =
the base
printer MIB done. If this is the case, then we and the IETF have fallen=
into a
trap that, inappropriately, resulted from these good intentions.
I'm having a difficult time understanding why the Job MIB is not charte=
red and
would like an explanation.
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems
=