Stuart Rowley commented:
> Jay said he is starting to like the sound of a Job State MIB and a Job
> Attribute MIB. Maybe this isn't as far fetched as it sounds. Like
> Harry, I view the monitoring and accounting aspects of the MIB as
> addressing distinctly different needs. Perhaps we should separate the
> MIB to meet these different needs. We sure could make a simple Job
> State MIB which would likely be implemented across the board!
How many others feel this way? (And how many others are opposed?)
Would it be possible for all list participants to post their one-word
opinion/vote on this question:
Are you in favor of the JMP group exploring the potential for
splitting the current Job Monitoring MIB into two separate MIBs,
one that focuses on job status and the other for job accounting?
Just a simple "Yes" or "No" is being requested; if you want to add
something to the discussion, then great! But let's at least see
whether this is a topic worth investigating *before* the San Diego
meetings next week.
...jay