PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Justification for prtAlertTime and prtAlertTimeGrou

PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Justification for prtAlertTime and prtAlertTimeGrou

Re: PMP> Justification for prtAlertTime and prtAlertTimeGrou

Jay Martin (jkm@underscore.com)
Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:57:06 -0500

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------B7F6D6CFF74925C453B7AABC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Umm...I don't think so, Bob. (I can't speak for Dave Kellerman.)

While it's true that I always had quite a bit of heartburn
accepting the group's original decision to NOT require some
kind of a timing value (relative or absolute) for an alert
event, I always just accepted the group's wishes.

Later, when the group finally realized that, "Hey, we also
must support MIB-II...and that requires time-ticks!", it
then became pretty apparent (to me, anyway) that an alert
time component for an alert entry should be MANDATORY, since
all printers supporting the Printer MIB had that value, anyway.

I don't wish to fight the mandatory-vs-optional argument all over
again. But suffice to say, I was NOT involved in the move of the
original alert time object from one part of the MIB to another.

Could such a move have been proposed by Tom Hastings, perhaps
motivated by creating "a more perfect MIB"? (Hey, let's keep
passing this buck! ;-)

Again, Dave Kellerman may have some fond memories of this situation.

...jay

----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- JK Martin | Email: jkm@underscore.com --
-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
-- Hudson, NH 03051-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------B7F6D6CFF74925C453B7AABC
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by uscore.underscore.com (8.8.4/8.7.2) with ESMTP id NAA14090; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:06:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA06027; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:06:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:05:41 -0500
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA05904 for pmp-outgoing; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:02:46 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <01BCF5A3.B087DEA0@hpb15510.boi.hp.com>
From: Bob Pentecost <bpenteco@boi.hp.com>
To: "pmp@pwg.org" <pmp@pwg.org>
Subject: RE: PMP> Justification for prtAlertTime and prtAlertTimeGrou
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 11:01:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: pmp-owner@pwg.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I think Harry's got this right.=20

While we're on the topic of prtAlertTime, I had a question come to me =
about this object. As I had mentioned when we were changing this object =
to mandatory, the sysUpTime is kept in our Network Interface Card (the =
issue at the time was due to problems getting the time from the NIC, but =
I don't care to revisit that aspect). What's the printer to do when it =
has two such cards installed? One might argue that there's one power =
supply so the times start when the power is turned on, but the time =
could also be kept in an external NIC that communicates with the printer =
over the parallel port. Also, I'm not sure, but the clock drift between =
two NIC timers could be significant.

Any thoughts?

Bob Pentecost
HP

----------

11/19/97 11:16 PM
To: pmp@pwg.org @ internet
cc: lpyoung@lexmark.com@internet
From: Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM @ IBMUS
Subject: Re: PMP> Justification for prtAlertTime and prtAlertTimeGroup =
ch

I would expect Jay or Dave to chime in here because I think they are the =
ones
who finally realized the great benefit to knowing something about the =
time
related to events. My recollection is that we simply realized timing of =
events
is essential information and should not be considered optional. The time =
is in
TICKS or something related to sysUpTime, so there's no extra burden in =
terms of
time keeping or having to put a Timex (or Rolex) in the machine.

Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems

pmp-owner@pwg.org on 11/19/97 11:54:57 AM
Please respond to pmp-owner@pwg.org @ internet
To: pmp@pwg.org @ internet
cc:
Subject: PMP> Justification for prtAlertTime and prtAlertTimeGroup ch

I am finally getting around to gathering up the justifications
for the changes between RFC1759 and the new Printer MIB. I have
been able to collect the justification for all changes except
for one. The change that I can not find any justification for
is the move of prtAlertTime from the prtAlertTimeGroup to the
prtAlertTableGroup and the subsequent deprecation of the
prtAlertTimeGroup. I have searched both the PMP and PWG mail
archives and while I can find mail that discusses the change,
I can not find any mail that says why the change was made or
why the change was required.
Help?
Lloyd
------------------------------------------------------------
Lloyd Young Lexmark International, Inc.
Senior Program Manager Dept. C14L/Bldg. 035-3
Strategic Alliances 740 New Circle Road NW
internet: lpyoung@lexmark.com Lexington, KY 40550
Phone: (606) 232-5150 Fax: (606) 232-6740

--------------B7F6D6CFF74925C453B7AABC--