WIMS> WIMS Concall 17 January 12 Noon EST

From: William A Wagner (wamwagner@comcast.net)
Date: Tue Jan 15 2008 - 11:21:51 EST

  • Next message: Ira McDonald: "WIMS> Counter MIB - fixed Usage paragraphs"

    Next WIMs/CIM concall is Thursday 17 January at 12 Noon EST.

    Dial In: 1-866-365-4406
    Toll #: 1-303-248-9655
    Passcode: 2635888#

    Agenda

    1. Review of the Minutes of the 10 January
    ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/wims/minutes/cim_080110.pdf
    2. Consideration comments to the Imaging System State and Counter MIB
    v2 (see below)
      ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/wims/wd/wd-wimscountmib20-20080107.pdf
    We want to get WG consensus so that this can be posted for PWG last call
    before Feb F2F. Please look through the document, post comments or have some
    ready for the meeting.
    3. CIM Activities

    Thanks,

    Bill Wagner

    1. Line 1582 onward- Usage information/notes for times gives three possible
    derivation sources. As discussed last week, the three possible derivations
    (sysUpTime, hrSystemUpTime and printer-up-time in IPP/1.1 Model) do not all
    necessarily correspond to time that the service is up, although the
    distinction may not be significant. My suggestion was that only sysUpTime be
    referenced, since that is virtually guaranteed to be supported and would
    ensure consistent implementation. But this should be discussed.

    2. Line 1872 - The usage description for icMonitorMemoryAllocWarnings,
    taken cold, seems a bit off.
            "Usage: This counter is intended to support increasing available
            memory on an Imaging System before job failures occur."
    If a usage comment is needed at all, I would suggest something like:
            "Usage: This counter provides a measure the safety margin in memory
    capacity, to indicate that inadequate Imaging System memory capacity should
    be increased before job failures occur."

    3. Line 1901 - A similar comment with regard to
    icMonitorStorageAllocWarnings

    4. Line 2622 and 2640 - I think I have a problem with the usage information
    in icTrafficInputMessages and icTrafficOutputMessages.
            "System input messages may be mapped from ifInUcastPkts"
    In the Counter Spec, we defined
    "Message - A single application protocol request or response (that may
    consist of multiple application protocol data units) received or sent by
    Service such as EmailIn or FaxOut."

    Even neglecting the question of how one associates ifInUcastPkts to a
    specific protocol, it does not strike me that there is a clear correlation
    between message and unicast packets.

    5. Line 3876: two section breaks?

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 15 2008 - 11:25:23 EST