IPP Mail Archive: IPP> Re: NOT - IPP MIB v0.1 for Notifications - 16 Aug 1999

IPP Mail Archive: IPP> Re: NOT - IPP MIB v0.1 for Notifications - 16 Aug 1999

IPP> Re: NOT - IPP MIB v0.1 for Notifications - 16 Aug 1999

Ira Mcdonald (imcdonal@sdsp.mc.xerox.com)
Wed, 18 Aug 1999 10:18:03 -0400

[This mail fell in a black hole yesterday]

From: Ira Mcdonald <imcdonal@sdsp.mc.xerox.com>
Received: by appsrv1.sdsp.mc.xerox.com (SMI-8.6/client-1.3)
id QAA24945; Tue, 17 Aug 1999 16:19:13 -0400
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 16:19:13 -0400
Message-Id: <199908172019.QAA24945@appsrv1.sdsp.mc.xerox.com>
To: ipp@pwg.org
Subject: Re: NOT - IPP MIB v0.1 for Notifications - 16 Aug 1999
content-length: 812

Hi folks,

One comment I didn't include in my release note. In the revised
MIB text, I added an object (in the Printer table) for
'printer-state-message' (an Optional IPP attribute) and an
object (in the leaf objects in the Event group) for
'job-state-message'.

I suggest that a useful improvement in the IPP Notifications
would be that systems which support the optional 'state-message'
attributes SHOULD append them to the notification (printer OR
job state message, that is), as long as the result would not
overflow the MTU (maximum transmission unit) for the delivery
protocol. The 'xxx-state-message' attributes already have
a message catalog on any server that supports them for
all implemented natural languages.

Comments?

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald
High North Inc
906-494-2697/2434 (home/office)