<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:10 PM, William R. Elliot wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">OK. Totally missed that I could send FSD as a status from the driver...sorry. I'll give that a shot.<br></span></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>Bill,</div><div><br></div><div>Not a problem. I think you are breaking new ground here, but it's something that we should consider for other big UPS models.</div><div><br></div><div>Arnaud,</div><div><br></div><div>Have you had a chance to follow this discussion? Basically, it sounds like we have a gap in the shutdown mechanism if NUT is set up to monitor an UPS, but the force-shutdown command is sent to the UPS by another system which is not the NUT master. This would probably apply to Eaton's multi-user UPSes like those monitored by snmp-ups and the XML-based cards.</div><div><br></div><div>top of the thread: <a href="http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3C201202092250.q19MoEhE018871@wreassoc.com%3E">http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c201202092250.q19MoEhE018871%40wreassoc.com%3e</a></div><br><div apple-content-edited="true">
<div>-- </div><div>Charles Lepple</div><div>clepple@gmail</div><div><br></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br></body></html>