When you say (below) that "no changes to the Printer MIB are required",
we can assume you mean the actual MIB definition and not the draft text
surrounding that definition, right?
I agree that the *MIB* should not change, but certainly the text of the
I-D (that becomes the RFC) should be modified to include a simple, yet
concise statement about critical alerts (paraphrasing your proposed
Any condition for which the printer stops operation should result
in the addition of an alert in the Alert Table; such an alert must
have its prtAlertSeverityLevel variable assigned with the value
I would suggest that this text should go into the I-D/RFC text at the
very least. If we also want to put it in Gail's FAQ, then great.
----- Begin Included Message -----
To: "pmp%pwg.org" <email@example.com>
From: Lloyd Young <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 7 May 97 10:00:11 EDT
Subject: PMP> Top 25 minus 4 conditions/alerts proposal
I want to bring this discussion thread to some conclusion. After
reviewing the discussion, the conclusion that I arrive at is that
no changes to the Printer MIB are required. I think it would be
beneficial if some of this discussion was placed in Gail's FAQ
document. For example, a statement from Harry's last e-mail on
this topic might be helpful:
Alerts that stop the printer are denoted as critical and alerts
that don't as warnings.
There has been alot of discussion on this item so it is entirely
possible that I have overlooked something. Therefore please
speak up if I am entirely off base on my conclusion.
Lloyd Young Lexmark International, Inc.
Senior Program Manager Dept. C14L/Bldg. 035-3
Strategic Alliances 740 New Circle Road NW
internet: email@example.com Lexington, KY 40550
Phone: (606) 232-5150 Fax: (606) 232-6740
----- End Included Message -----