Keith,
I am sorry for the confusion my email has caused regarding the Job
Monitoring MIB. The Job Monitoring MIB is a work product
of the IETF Printer MIB Working Group.
Ron Bergman
Dataproducts Corp.
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Keith Moore wrote:
> I don't understand. Why is the Printer Working Group, which is not
> affiliated with IETF, working on documents which are marked as work
> items of the IETF Printer MIB working group?
>> I'm happy to see that the PWG is asking IETF MIB experts for review
> of its documents, and I have no objection to the technical changes
> mentioned in your message. But I continue to find the apparent confusion
> of PWG members about the relationship of PWG with IETF working groups,
> quite disconcerting.
>> Keith
>>> > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 08:07:32 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
> > From: Ron Bergman <rbergma at dpc.com>
> > To: WIJNEN at VNET.IBM.COM, dperkins at scruznet.com> > cc: jmp at pwg.org, Lloyd Young <lpyoung at lexmark.com>,
> > Chris Wellens <chrisw at iwl.com>,
> > Tom Hastings <hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com>,
> > Harry Lewis <harryl at us.ibm.com>, moore at cs.utk.edu, scoya at ietf.org,
> > Harald.Alvestrand at maxware.no, rfc-editor at isi.edu> > Subject: Job Monitoring MIB, Request for Publication as an RFC
> >
> > Bert and David,
> >
> > The Printer Working Group has revised the Job Monitoring MIB draft,
> > incorporating many of the changes that you have recommended. We believe
> > that the documents are now ready to be published as RFCs. The latest
> > drafts are available in the IETF Internet-Drafts directory as:
> >
> > draft-ietf-printmib-job-monitor-08.txt (Feb 19, 1999)
> > draft-ietf-printmib-job-protomap-04.txt (Sept 21, 1998)
> >
> > During our previous communications, you had suggested that the MIB
> > document be published as an Experimental RFC. The PWG does not object
> > to either an Informational or an Experimental status. The companion
> > Mapping Recommendations document should be an Informational RFC
> > regardless.
> >
> > We are requesting that you review the updated document and provide a
> > recommendation for publication. Following your review, the PWG will
> > submit the documents to the appropriate IETF representative for
> > publication.
> >
> > A summary of the document changes:
> >
> > 1. All REFERENCES clauses have been removed since they referred to
> > sections in the specification that are not within the actual MIB.
> > This change was recommended by Bert Wijnen and Keith McCloghrie.
> >
> > 2. Moved the definitions of the enumerations from the Textual Convention
> > entries in the MIB to the sections preceding the MIB. This change
> > was applied to JmAttributeTypeTC, JmJobSubmissionIDTypeTC,
> > JmJobStateReasons1TC, JmJobStateReasons2TC, JmJobStateReasons3TC, and
> > JmJobStateReasons4TC. This change was recommended by Keith
> > McCloghrie.
> >
> > 3. Added the related data types as ASN.1 comments for each enumeration
> > in JmAttributeTypeTC.
> >
> > 4. Replaced the use of "SHALL" with "is" for those cases where the
> > statement is not a conformance requirement. This change was
> > recommended by Bert Wijnen.
> >
> > 5. Clarified sections 3.3.3 and 3.3.7 to explain that the DEFVAL of 0
> > for index attributes is different from the DEFVAL of -2 for
> > JmAttributeValueAsInteger.
> >
> > 6. Clarified the relationships of the values of JmJobCollationTypeTC
> > with the IPP "multiple-document-handling" attribute.
> >
> > 7. Clarified that the values of the mediumRequested(170) and
> > mediumConsumed(171) attributes may be any of the IPP media values of
> > media name, media size names, and input tray names.
> >
> > 8. Added two new attributes, mediumTypeConsumed(174) and
> > mediumSizeConsumed(175) to JmAttributeTypeTC.
> >
> > 9. Changed "insure" to "ensure".
> >
> > 10. Fixed an incorrect reference in the jmAttributeEntry DESCRIPTION
> > clause from jmJobTable to jmAttributeTable.
> >
> >
> > The PWG would like to thank you for your time and patience in this matter.
> >
> >
> > For the PWG,
> >
> > Ron Bergman
> > Dataproducts Corp.
> > rbergma at dpc.com> > voice: 805 578 4421
> > fax: 805 578 4005
> >
> >
>