The value I see in "replacing the database structure" vs. "allowing data
base information to be expressed in XML" is that the later is a given and
can be done, today. But we are going to standardize this expression to
make it useful. Why stop short of developing a standard, then, which can
support intra-, extra-, cross-enterprise solutions?
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
----------------------------------------------
"Wagner,William" <WWagner@NetSilicon.com>
Sent by: owner-wbmm@pwg.org
03/04/2003 11:30 AM
To: "MARKLE,CATHY (HP-Boise,ex1)" <cathy_markle@hp.com>
cc: "'Wbmm (E-mail)" <wbmm@pwg.org>
Subject: RE: WBMM> RE: Scope and Starting Point
Cathy,
Thanks for the explanation. And I fully agree that WebJetAdmin could use
its server capability to accept inputs from monitored devices/services,
using whatever scheme WBMM comes up with.
But there are still a few points that are unclear to me.
At least in all of the instances I am aware of, the purpose and level of
management from outside the firewall is quite different from
intra-enterprise management. Indeed, it is likely the local managers will
require that remote access be limited. That is, the functional purposes of
remote management point to different operational capabilities than are
required for local management. Since WJA must continue to support SNMP for
the existing base, why put the additional requirements associated with
local management upon WBMM when the main purpose of using an XML-coded
communication are for remote access?
Another point which is unclear is what you mean by "replacing the MIB with
XML". To me the MIB is the organized data base. You can (and probably do)
express the MIB contents not only using SNMP, but also in
printer-generated web pages and control panel menus. You can express MIB
contents using XML. Therefore I am unsure of for what purpose the
replacement of the MIB is necessary. I know that Harry wants to
restructure the information to address failings in the original effort.
But as worthy as that objective may be in itself, I fail to see that it is
a necessary requirement for extra-enterprise management.
I will support the group consensus on this. But we need to define what we
are doing and why we are doing it. If we are replacing the data base
structure, then we need to be clear on why we are doing it and how it is
related to the primary objective. If we are just allowing data base
information to be expressed in XML, the reason for this is more apparent.
I look forward to a good discussion this afternoon.
Best regards,
Bill Wagner
-----Original Message-----
From: MARKLE,CATHY (HP-Boise,ex1) [mailto:cathy_markle@hp.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:27 PM
To: Wagner,William; McDonald, Ira; Harry Lewis
Cc: TAYLOR,BOB (HP-Vancouver,ex1); 'Wbmm (E-mail)
Subject: RE: WBMM> RE: Scope and Starting Point
Bill,
You are correct that WebJetadmin currently uses SNMP but there is nothing
stopping the use of another protocol. Also, WebJetadmin does provide a
HTTP
server to provide information to a user, but if you think of WJA as a
service, anybody can use the information collected in any manner required.
A great internal scenario as well as external scenario would be to be able
to use WebJetadmin to manage devices. WJA is a tool that can definitely
be
used to go through a firewall to manage and monitor devices on a remote
network. This is where I can see one of the benefits of replacing the MIB
with XML.
Cathy
-----Original Message-----
From: Wagner,William [mailto:WWagner@NetSilicon.com]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 8:08 AM
To: McDonald, Ira; Harry Lewis
Cc: TAYLOR,BOB (HP-Vancouver,ex1); 'Wbmm (E-mail)
Subject: RE: WBMM> RE: Scope and Starting Point
Ira wrote:
"..I think that Bob Taylor articulated the "internal" scenario - plugging
into the existing systems management platforms, like Web Jet Admin,
OpenView, Tivoli, etc."
I am afraid that, at least I, would need a bit more information than this
on
how the internal scenario would play out. From my undoubtedly inadequate
understanding, Web Jet Admin is an application that uses SNMP ( and
perhaps
other methods) to poll printers, and in turn provides a HTTP server to
allow
users to access that data so obtained. OpenView is an SNMP-based
management
application.
Could Bob (or someone else) indicate what they expect of the WBMM in terms
of providing a "plug-in" for the popular management apps? And the
replacement of SNMP is necessary? Would this "plug-in" be, in fact, an
HTTP
server to receive reports from registered printers? Or is it just a common
semantic for communicating with the printer? Or...??
Thanks.
Bill Wagner
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 04 2003 - 13:39:22 EST