> Have a look at the following list of variables that we already support: > > (device|ups).model > (device|ups).mfr > (device|ups).serial > (device|ups).type > (device|ups).firmware > (device|ups).firmware.aux > (device|ups).id > > 1) In what way is the suggested new variable name different from the > ones above?
Device Part number is unique for all the devices and will help in identify the device. This is provided by the manufacturer for the particular device. (device|ups).id seems to be relevant, but I guess, it is the identifier for the device which can be r/w; and will be different for two devices with same part number. device.part can be a read-only value read from the device wherever supported / applicable. I was looking into BCMXCP TODO List and found part number as a value provided in the Config Block. As per XCP Protocol document, --------------------------------- 5.2 Identification and Configuration The UPS must have a way of reporting its Identification and Configuration information, including: * Model name (must not have Manufacturer in the text) * VA rating * "manufacturer" * Serial and model or CTO numbers * Customer-set identification string * nominal input and output volts, amps, VA, power, and frequency * Identification of submodules: version, name or part # --------------------------------- device.part can be useful for identifying the ups. > 2) Why do we need to be able to access this remotely? > > NUT is not an ERP system. > Part number is present for almost all the devices and can help identify the model and other details using the part number. Best Regards, Chetan _______________________________________________ Nut-upsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
