Subject: PMP> Re: Print MIB 09

From: "Harry Lewis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:58:46 -0700

I agree this is the best approach due to the pre-existing (high) level of 
interoperability.
---------------------------------------------- 
Harry Lewis 
IBM Printing Systems 
---------------------------------------------- 

Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
11/12/2001 08:08 AM

        To:     [email-masked]
        cc:     [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], 
[email-masked], [email-masked], Harry 
Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, [email-masked], [email-masked], 
[email-masked], [email-masked]
        Subject:        Re: Print MIB 09

>>>>> Juergen Schoenwaelder writes:

Juergen> Another option that just came to my mind would be to
Juergen> introduce a new accessible-for-notify object which holds the
Juergen> prtAlertIndex value for a given notification and replaces
Juergen> prtAlertIndex in the printerV2Alert notification.

Sorry, this does not work as the new object would have a different
OID. So forget about it.

So I go back to my original position: Keep the notification as it is.
Add a comment saying that the notification definition does not
strictly comply to SMIv2 rules and that a proper fix (deprecating the
notification and definition of a new notification) is considered too
costly since fielded implementations interoperate just fine with the
current definition.

/js