PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> Deadlines

PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> Deadlines

RE: PMP> Deadlines

Ira Mcdonald x10962 (imcdonal@eso.mc.xerox.com)
Fri, 25 Jul 1997 13:55:30 PDT

Hi Bob,

While you seem to be saying 'just ship it', what if (as is very possible,
under the RFC 2130 recommendations), our Area Directors decline to TAKE
a draft to Munich which does not clarify the code set(s) of all of the
several dozen human-readable strings, except the 'xxxDescription' ones
and the two under 'prtGeneralConsoleLocalization' control?

The issues have been here to be examined for the last two years (that
vendors have been shipping product). One real sharp technical writer
at ANY of the vendors could have pointed out / realized that the
'ASCII' with no reference and no constraints in RFC 1759 was at
variance with the actual implementations.

Tom has done an excellent job of bringing far more rigor to this
discussion, but the issues have been there since mid-April, when
I brought up much of what has flashed around in the 'mail storm'
this week.

At some point, you'll have to let your JetAdmin and other UI experts
decide how to bring future HP products into line with EITHER the
old RFC 1759 text OR any resolution we work out for the next
Printer MIB version, anyway. Why not apply them to the task
in a timely fashion? (Xerox and FujiXerox engineers have been
very actively engaged with this issue for the last three months
- the excellent summaries that Tom has put forward were based
on input from dozens of these people)

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald (outside consultant at Xerox)
High North Inc
PO Box 221
Grand Marais, MI 49839
906-494-2434

------------------------ Bob's note ------------------------------
Return-Path: <pmp-owner@pwg.org>
Received: from zombi (zombi.eso.mc.xerox.com) by snorkel.eso.mc.xerox.com (4.1/XeroxClient-1.1)
id AA16551; Fri, 25 Jul 97 16:27:33 EDT
Received: from alpha.xerox.com by zombi (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA05348; Fri, 25 Jul 97 16:24:18 EDT
Received: from lists.underscore.com ([199.125.85.31]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <53565(3)>; Fri, 25 Jul 1997 13:24:20 PDT
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA10787 for <imcdonal@eso.mc.xerox.com>; Fri, 25 Jul 1997 16:20:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 25 Jul 1997 16:18:03 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA10247 for pmp-outgoing; Fri, 25 Jul 1997 16:13:45 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <01BC9904.D331B3A0@hpb15432.boi.hp.com>
From: Bob Pentecost <bpenteco@boi.hp.com>
To: "pmp@pwg.org" <pmp@pwg.org>, "'Chris Wellens'" <chrisw@iwl.com>
Subject: RE: PMP> Deadlines
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 13:12:31 PDT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: pmp-owner@pwg.org
Status: R

> ----------
From: Chris Wellens[SMTP:chrisw@iwl.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 1997 12:03 PM
> To: pmp@pwg.org
> Subject: PMP> Deadlines
>=20
<stuff deleted>
>=20
> Jay had asked earlier:
>=20
> > What if you're against a proposal because you believe the time
> > it would take to assimilate the proposal into the working
> > draft would exceed the deadline for the draft?
>=20
> Then you assess how much time it would take for you to do a
> proper evaluation and set of comments and you tell the WG chairs
> how much time you would need. (This is happening with=20
> great frequency on the SNMPv3 mailing list.) =20
>=20
> Since we are past our deadline, I must ask everyone how much
> additional time you believe is required to get to resolution on the=20
> big set of issues (Hasting's Five Alternatives)? 24 hours?, 48
> hours? We do need to close down the MIB and the working group.
> The mailing list and discussion can continue. =20

It would take me most (probably all) of next week to get a complete =
answer. I would have to get together the people that are the experts in =
localization, JetAdmin (for various systems) and printer firmware; =
explain the problem and proposed solutions to them; let them evaluate =
the impact to their components; collect and summarize their comments.=20

I can do this but I have to be assured that it would be of value. So far =
we've been coming up with various solutions and tweaking them. Are we =
sure that one of the five alternatives will be the final answer? I don't =
want to waste the time of a bunch of people.

In all honesty, I feel like we've completed the Printer MIB several =
times now. I want to get it "out the door".

Bob Pentecost
HP

>=20
> =
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
> --=3D=3D--=3D=3D--=3D=3D- Chris Wellens =20
> =3D=3D--=3D=3D--=3D=3D--=3D Email: chrisw@iwl.com Web: =
http://www.iwl.com/
> --=3D=3D--=3D=3D--=3D=3D- InterWorking Labs, Inc. 244 Santa Cruz =
Ave, Aptos, CA 95003
> =3D=3D--=3D=3D--=3D=3D--=3D Tel: +1 408 685 3190 Fax: +1 408 =
662 9065
> =
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20