Does anyone have any more technical reasons from the IESG as to why they
don't like the attribute structure that we have in the PWG Job Monitoring
MIB?
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: Hastings, Tom N [mailto:hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 16:29
To: jmp
Subject: JMP> FW: Document Action: Job Monitoring MIB - V1 to
Informational
The PWG Job Monitoring MIB has been approved by the IESG to be sent out as
an
Informational RFC. However, the IESG doesn't approve of our modeling of
management information. By this I assume they mean the attribute mechanism
that we invented to handle the great variability between implementations.
They also don't recognize the PWG as a standards making body according to
the note.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: The IESG [mailto:iesg-secretary at ietf.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 3:02 PM
Cc: RFC Editor; Internet Architecture Board; pmp at pwg.org
Subject: Document Action: Job Monitoring MIB - V1 to Informational
The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft 'Job Monitoring MIB - V1'
<draft-ietf-printmib-job-monitor-07.txt> as an Informational RFC. This
document is the product of the Printer MIB Working Group. The IESG
contact persons are Keith Moore and Patrik Faltstrom
Note to RFC Editor:
The IESG requests the following text be included as an IESG Note:
This MIB module uses an unconventional scheme for modeling
management information (on top of the SNMP model) which is unique to
this MIB. The IESG recommends against using this document as an
example for the design of future MIBs.
The "Printer Working Group" industry consortium is not an IETF
working group, and the IETF does not recognize the Printer Working
Group as a standards-setting body. This document is being published
solely to provide information to the Internet community regarding a
MIB that might be deployed in the marketplace. Publication of
this document as an RFC is not an endorsement of this MIB.