PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restru

PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restru

RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restructured Port MIB (18 Jul y 2005)

From: Mike Fenelon (mfenelon@windows.microsoft.com)
Date: Thu Jul 28 2005 - 19:54:53 EDT

  • Next message: Bergman, Ron: "RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restructured Port MIB (18 Jul y 2005)"

    So what does that mean to us?? It is ridiculous to have an obsolete OID
    in the MIB because we changed our mind during development.
     
    Mike Fenelon
    Microsoft
     
    ________________________________

    From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
    Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 11:20 AM
    To: Mike Fenelon; McDonald, Ira; thrasher@lexmark.com
    Cc: pmp@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restructured Port MIB (18
    Jul y 2005)
     
    It does not matter how long the OID has been out.
    What matters is if it was formally assigned (by whoever controls
    assignments in
        enterprises pwg(2699) mibs(1)
    and it seems (from the doc/mic that was posted) that ppmMIB did get and
    OID
    assigned, namely
         enterprises pwg(2699) mibs(1) ppmMIB(2)
     
    And so I claim it has been published and so in my view you would not
    re-order OIDs.
    There are sound technical reasons why that is the case, read
    RFC2579-2580 for that.
     
    If you had like an experimental tree somewhere under pwg, then you could
    do it
    there if you made VERY CLEAR statements that those are all for
    experimental
    and/or pre-release testing and so no-one should assume that OIDs in
    there are
    ever going to be permanent. You would still (in my view) re-root under
    some other
    branch at the top level of the ppmMIB module if you started reordering
    OIDs.
     
    Just trying to explain and help.
     
     Bert
     
            -----Original Message-----
            From: Mike Fenelon [mailto:mfenelon@windows.microsoft.com]
            Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 17:44
            To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); McDonald, Ira; thrasher@lexmark.com
            Cc: pmp@pwg.org
            Subject: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restructured Port
    MIB (18 Jul y 2005)
            The oid was only out for a few days. I think it would be much
    more confusing to have a hole for something we took out of a draft, than
    to simply move everything up after deleting the oid.
             
            Mike Fenelon
            Microsoft
             
            
    ________________________________

            From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org] On Behalf Of
    Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
            Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:28 AM
            To: McDonald, Ira; 'thrasher@lexmark.com'
            Cc: 'pmp@pwg.org'
            Subject: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restructured Port
    MIB (18 Jul y 2005)
             
            I have not followed detailed discussion on this... but
             
            - SMI rules state that one a document with a MIB is published,
    you can NEVER
              re-use an OID for some other purpose. All you can do is
    obsolete the
              old object and add a new one.
            - In IETF, when we just have internet drafts, we allow people to
    re-use an OID
              (supposedly no-one has used the OID while at internet draft
    state, besides.
              such MIB modules normally have a
             
                 ::= { mib-2 xxxx } -- xxxx to be assigned by IANA
             
              so there is no definite complete OID, and people who want to
    do early implementations
              fill in a number under their enterprise prerelease branch or
    so.
             
              the final xxxx gets assigned by IANA upon document approval
    (right before RFC
              publication) and so no OID changes are allowed anymore.
              See the SMI documents for the rationale.
             
            - But once published as RFC, we never re-use an OID, not even
    when a new rev is
              being published as a intrenet-draft.
             
            Hope this helps,
             
            Bert
                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org]On
    Behalf Of McDonald, Ira
                    Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 16:59
                    To: 'thrasher@lexmark.com'; McDonald, Ira
                    Cc: 'pmp@pwg.org'
                    Subject: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled]
    Restructured Port MIB (18 Jul y 2005)
                    Hi Jerry,
                     
                    There's no such thing as a reserved no-access object,
    but I'd be happy to leave
                    the hole (so that the OIDs don't change for any other
    columnar objects). Would
                    you prefer that?
                     
                    Note that ALL of the columnar objects were cleaned up
    and reordered (and
                    renumbered) in this latest revision, so it would be hard
    for there to be too many
                    implementations of the new OIDs already.
                     
                    Others - shall I leave the hole and leave the other new
    OID assignments stable?
                     
                    Cheers,
                    - Ira
                     
                    Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
                    Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
                    PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
                    phone: +1-906-494-2434
                    email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: thrasher@lexmark.com
    [mailto:thrasher@lexmark.com]
                            Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:33 AM
                            To: McDonald, Ira
                            Subject: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled]
    Restructured Port MIB (18 Jul y 2005)
                            
                            Ira,
                            
                            Are you just planning on creating a reserved
    no-access object where ppmPortEnabled "used" to be, or are
                            you going to delete the entry and shift
    everything else in the table up.??
                            
                            Jerry
                            
                            
     
    "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
    07/23/2005 01:56 PM
            
            To: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>,
    "'thrasher@lexmark.com'" <thrasher@lexmark.com>
            cc: "'pmp@pwg.org'" <pmp@pwg.org>,
    "'Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com'" <Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com>
            Subject: RE: PMP> [delete ppmPrinterEnabled] Restructured
    Port MIB (18 Jul y 2005)
                            
                            
                            
                            Hi,
                            
                            Let's delete ppmPrinterEnabled, because the
    'false' is redundant
                            with ppmPortEnabled of 'false' for all supported
    ports. And
                            because otherwise, we must say "ignore
    ppmPortEnabled of 'true'
                            for installation if ppmPrinterEnabled is
    'false'". Which leads
                            me to agree that we should delete
    ppmPrinterEnabled.
                            
                            When a Printer is permanently removed from an
    ENA interface,
                            the whole ppmPrinterTable row and all
    subordinate rows in
                            ppmPortTable can just be deleted.
                            
                            For 'ppmPortProtocolType' using
    'PrtChannelTypeTC', we're working
                            to get 'unknown(2)' registered quickly with
    IANA, so that we can
                            do the 'right thing' that Bert Wijnen pointed
    out.
                            
                            Cheers,
                            - Ira
                            
                            Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
                            Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
                            PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
                            phone: +1-906-494-2434
                            email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: McDonald, Ira
                            Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 1:37 PM
                            To: 'thrasher@lexmark.com'; McDonald, Ira
                            Cc: pmp@pwg.org; Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com
                            Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July
    2005)
                            
                            
                            Hi Jerry,
                            
                            I agree that feedback from the clients
    (Microsoft and Apple) on how they'd
                            like this to work would be helpful.
                            
                            Remember, that a value of 'ppmPrinterIndex' must
    NEVER be reassigned
                            to a different instance of a Printer at a later
    date. While the MIB may
                            grow and shrink, the base 'ppmPrinterIndex'
    should be immutably
                            associated with exactly one specific instance of
    a Printer. This is both
                            correct MIB practice and required by the object
    definition in the current
                            MIB draft.
                            
                            Cheers,
                            - Ira
                            
                            Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
                            Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
                            PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
                            phone: +1-906-494-2434
                            email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: thrasher@lexmark.com
    [mailto:thrasher@lexmark.com]
                            Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 1:28 PM
                            To: McDonald, Ira
                            Cc: pmp@pwg.org; Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com
                            Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18 July
    2005)
                            
                            
                            
                            I would think that the usefullness of the
    ppmPrinterEnabled for an
                            ENA would only be for the "transcient" case of
    the plugging/unplugging
                            of the related printer. However at some point
    (in the case that the printer
                            
                            stays unplugged "permanently") the printer entry
    and associated protocol
                            tables would be removed such that the the MIB
    could grow and shrink
                            over time.....
                            
                            For example, an ENA with a USB host interface
    that supports up to
                            128 attached printers, In my opinion, shouldn't
    need to have 128 printer
                            entries
                            in the MIB tables from first power on......only
    the entries that have
                            detected (valid 1284ID)
                            printers etc. attached.....otherwise you'd end
    up in most cases with 127
                            default printer entries
                            with associated port tables that don't actually
    go anywhere.
                            
                            Of course this behaviour is different from the
    current TCPMON.ini file
                            which has static entries.......
                            
                            I think maybe the clients should give guidance
    on how they want it to work.
                            
                            Jerry Thrasher
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
                            Sent by: pmp-owner@pwg.org
                            07/22/2005 12:13 PM
                            
                            To: "'Bergman, Ron'"
    <Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com>, "McDonald,
                            Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, "Wijnen, Bert
    (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>,
                            pmp@pwg.org
                            cc:
                            Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB
    (18 July 2005)
                            
                            
                            
                            Hi Ron,
                            
                            If the Printer entry is deleted when an ENA
    interface
                            is disconnected, then all the subordinate Port
    entries
                            MUST be deleted too (because they are indexed by
    the
                            object ppmPrinterIndex). This is ugly if the
    local
                            printer is promptly plugged _back_ into the
    interface.
                            
                            If the Printer entry is left in place but _not_
    clearly
                            marked 'disabled', then
    ppmPrinterIEEE1284DeviceId,
                            ppmPrinterHrDeviceIndex and all the other
    Printer
                            columnar objects must be reset (to default
    values).
                            
                            That's why the ppmPrinterEnabled object should
    be kept.
                            
                            The WG concensus was strong that ppmPortEnabled
    was
                            required to keep the port list static (fixed
    number
                            of ports for an interface). Therefore, I added
    the
                            ppmPrinterEnabled object.
                            
                            If others want ppmPrinterEnabled removed, would
    they
                            please speak up soon?
                            
                            Cheers,
                            - Ira
                            
                            PS - Remember that this MIB is supposed to work
    for
                            Network Spoolers too, where the concept of 'the
    printer
                            is removed' is fuzzy. The 'printer' is just
    some
                            configured downstream network printer that may
    well
                            be administratively disabled _without_ removing
    the
                            configuration at the Network Spooler.
                            
                            Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
                            Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
                            PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
                            phone: +1-906-494-2434
                            email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
                            
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Bergman, Ron
    [mailto:Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com]
    > Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:24 PM
    > To: McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert (Bert);
    pmp@pwg.org
    > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18
    July 2005)
    >
    >
    > Ira,
    >
    > Base on my experience with ENAs, they do not
    provide a feature to
    > disable an output port unless the printer is
    removed. Normally,
    > this is to replace a worn-out unit or upgrade
    a printer.
    > In this case the old printer is gone forever.
    So how does your
    > "STATIC entries" handle this situation?
    >
    > Ron
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: McDonald, Ira
    [mailto:imcdonald@sharplabs.com]
    > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:38 AM
    > To: Bergman, Ron; McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert
    (Bert); pmp@pwg.org
    > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18
    July 2005)
    >
    >
    > Hi Ron,
    >
    > Based on previous IPP experience, it will take
    MONTHS to add one
    > new enum to the PrtChannelTypeTC with IANA -
    that would stop the
    > Port Mon MIB dead in its tracks until it was
    accepted by IANA.
    >
    > About ppmPrinterEnabled - same rationale as
    ppmPortEnabled - keeps
    > the number of Printer entries STATIC in an
    implementation - lets
    > the user see that the one Printer (i.e.,
    hardward output interface)
    > on an External Network Adapter should
    presently be ignored.
    >
    > Remember that the Port Mon MIB MUST NOT depend
    on either Host
    > Resources or Printer MIB, by common concensus
    - it may only
    > AUGMENT them, if they are present.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > - Ira
    >
    > Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
    > Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
    > PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
    > phone: +1-906-494-2434
    > email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
    >
    > > -----Original Message-----
    > > From: Bergman, Ron
    [mailto:Ron.Bergman@rpsa.ricoh.com]
    > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:40 PM
    > > To: McDonald, Ira; Wijnen, Bert (Bert);
    pmp@pwg.org
    > > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18
    July 2005)
    > >
    > >
    > > Ira,
    > >
    > > I am not sure what value ppmPrinterEnabled
    adds to the MIB.
    > > This appears to be analogous to
    > > On Line/Off Line. If I want to create a
    driver for the
    > > printer I don't care what the current
    > > state is. That information is only
    necessary when I am ready
    > > to print and then this MIB is
    > > not used.
    > >
    > > I believe that Bert has a valid point in
    using
    > > ppmPortProtocolType. It is not a major
    effort
    > > to add unknown(2) to the IANA registrations.
    > >
    > > Otherwise, the changes are inline with our
    discussions
    > > following the test.
    > >
    > > Ron
    > >
    > > -----Original Message-----
    > > From: pmp-owner@pwg.org
    [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org]On Behalf
    > > Of McDonald,
    > > Ira
    > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:46 AM
    > > To: 'Wijnen, Bert (Bert)'; McDonald, Ira;
    'pmp@pwg.org'
    > > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB (18
    July 2005)
    > >
    > >
    > > Hi Bert,
    > >
    > > Thanks for your quick feedback. My replies
    inline below.
    > >
    > > Cheers,
    > > - Ira
    > >
    > >
    > > Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
    > > Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
    > > PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
    > > phone: +1-906-494-2434
    > > email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
    > >
    > > > -----Original Message-----
    > > > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
    [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
    > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:08 AM
    > > > To: McDonald, Ira; 'pmp@pwg.org'
    > > > Subject: RE: PMP> Restructured Port MIB
    (18 July 2005)
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Only did a very very quick scan.
    > > >
    > > > Comments.
    > > >
    > > > - ppmPortProtocolTargetPort OBJECT-TYPE
    > > > SYNTAX Integer32 (0..65535)
    > > > I propose that you use InetPortNumber TC
    from RFC4001
    > > >
    > >
    > > Won't work, because this port is not limited
    to Internet Suite
    > > protocols. The 'service:' URI in
    ppmPortServiceNameOrURI may
    > > also be for non-Internet suites (AppleTalk,
    NetWare, etc.).
    > >
    > > I'll correct the DESCRIPTION in the MIB and
    make clear that
    > > (as with the Printer MIB) ports/channels may
    be from multiple
    > > protocol suites.
    > >
    > >
    > > > - ppmPortProtocolType OBJECT-TYPE
    > > > SYNTAX Integer32 (0..2147483647)
    > > >
    > > > WHy not use TC PrtChannelTypeTC as the
    SYNTAX?
    > > > I do see that you want to use zero
    (meaning not supported).
    > > > But maybe better is to use none(1) in
    that case, or maybe
    > > > adding an enumeration to the TC of
    notSupported(xx) ??
    > > > It is now an IANA-maintained TC, so it
    should not be that
    > > > difficult to get a label added.
    > > >
    > >
    > > Won't work. PrtChannelTypeTC currently only
    defines 'other(1)'
    > > and (foolishly) does NOT define 'unknown(2)'
    (unlike every other
    > > textual convention in the Printer MIB).
    Because the Printer MIB
    > > v2 still doesn't define DEFVAL clauses for
    most objects, this
    > > oversight has not surfaced before. We could
    register 'unknown(2)'
    > > with IANA, but _not_ fast enough (because
    this MIB's going into OS
    > > and printer vendor products right now).
    > >
    > >
    > > > - ppmPortPrtChannelIndex has a reference
    to RFC1213, while I
    > > > think I would reather reference RFC2863
    (the current IF-MIB)
    > > >
    > > > Bert
    > > >
    > >
    > > Agreed. My mistake from the old Printer MIB
    (RFC 1759).
    > >
    > > I'll correct the references in the MIB.
    > > - Ira
    > >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 28 2005 - 19:54:39 EDT