PMP Mail Archive: Re: Re[2]: PMP> Should Alerts be replicated???

PMP Mail Archive: Re: Re[2]: PMP> Should Alerts be replicated???

Re: Re[2]: PMP> Should Alerts be replicated???

JK Martin (jkm@underscore.com)
Tue, 14 Jan 97 12:15 EST

Bill,

Thanks for your excellent comments. Regarding your final statement:

> I would not suggest that it be required or recommended that the
> printer re-enter a warning alert should the initial alert have been
> removed to accommodate other events.

Not reentering the warning doesn't feel right to me. Maybe it's just
a gut feeling, but without critical/warning alerts in the Alert Table,
the mgmt app, upon initial contact with the printer, is forced to query
the subunit status of every component in the Printer MIB to determine
if any problem states exist.

Of course, if all vendors implemented the HR MIB magic cookie status
variables correctly, then a mgmt app should be able to easily denote
an overall problem state in the printer. However, our recent experience
has shown that consistent support for these HR MIB variables to be sparse
at best. Perhaps if this situation changes, then using the HR MIB as a
top-level indication to force per-subunit queries would be fine, IMHO.

Angelo Caruso (Xerox) has gone on record as saying he believes Alerts
removed from the Alert Table due to space limitations should be reentered
into the Alert Table when space becomes available (and the Alert condition
persists). Bill believes the opposite.

Recommendations from other printer vendors are most encouraged. Let's
hear what you have to say!

...jay

----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- JK Martin | Email: jkm@underscore.com --
-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
-- Hudson, NH 03015-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
----------------------------------------------------------------------