[Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

[Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

[Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

Petrie, Glen glen.petrie at eitc.epson.com
Fri Jun 8 21:21:44 UTC 2012


 

 

Joe,

 

</ 

There is nothing to prevent, and actually a lot to recommend/require, a
Cloud Print Provider from supporting multiple Cloud Print System
Services, based on a variety of performance, contractual and legal
agreements/reasons.  It is not unusual that a customer's requirement for
a cloud service be that the customer's data never reside on or be
processed on a service that does not reside in a specified country.
With a multinational Cloud Print Provider, this would necessitate they
provide multiple Cloud Print System Services on multiple pieces of
physical hardware that resides in multiple countries).  

/>

According to the definition in the model the Cloud Print System Service
(CPSS) "creates Cloud Print Services (CPS) and enumerates CPS available
to authenticated Cloud Print Users".

 

Thus, you want the Cloud Print Provider (CPP) (the environment) to have
multiple services that create CPS's and can enumerate CPS's; which, if I
follow your use-case, span multiples countries.   I don't really
understand.  A single CPSS could create the CPS in any country.  Your
statements states that the customer's data must be in a specific
country; ok!  The CPSS does not possess customer's data, a CPS does
(may); where the CPS resides in the country of interest. 

Agreed, the data that is passed to a CPSS is a very small set of user
information.  However, there is still nothing to prevent a particulat
deployment of multipl CPSSs by a Cloud Print Provider (for whatever
reasonds, including customer security requirement) and the model should
reflect that.

 

We agree; just not on the name !!!

 

</

In this scenario, a user/company/printer/other service needs to have a
well know endpoint to start with (the Cloud Print Provider), from which
it can be redirect as necessary to the appropriate system service, and
ultimately the proper print service, based on information associated
with a user's account.  If we combine the Cloud Print Provider and the
Cloud Print System Service this account-base separation and redirection
is no longer possible.

/>

According to the definition in the model the Cloud Print Provider "is
the environment in which the CPSS and CPS's reside. "   So from this
definition, there would have to be multiple CPPs; one for each
constrained environment. 

And since we agreed at the F2F that the Cloud Print Provider (the entity
providing the Cloud Print services) is NOT the same as the Cloud
Provider (the entity owning all of the hardware and Cloud
infrastructure), you dealing with instances of a software process (the
CPP).

 

I believe Epson's and HP's own all the hardware and Cloud infrastructure
associated with their Cloud Print Solutions; so, it is not true that a
Cloud Print Provider could not be a Cloud Provider.   Agreed even within
an Epson's or HP's Cloud Print Solution we would want to make the
distinctions between infrastructure components (software) and Printing
components; but, User registration is not a cloud infrastructure
component.   For Google, User registration is associated with their
general Google Cloud accounts, while for Epson and HP, the only Cloud
functionality is Print; so Cloud Provider == Cloud Print Provider.

 

I actually don't understand your use-case.   Any CPP (Epson's, HP's,
Google's, Ford's, etc.) is just the environment (the collection of cloud
print software entities).   Assuming it is public in a world wide sense
(and not private where everything is "contained"); then there will
always be single specific world wide entry points for registration, user
accounts, and so forth.   It is fairly likely that the entry points
processing software does nothing more than redirect to one of many,
many, many Cloud Print Registry (CPR) that can communicate with each
other and share information (i.e. a user and printer registration data
base). (Either for load balancing or in your case for domain
constraint.)  Any one of the CPR can instantiate a CPS and, if
necessary, on a specific domain server or in a specific country.

Agreed on the single, well-known endpoint to begin the registration
process, or to authenticate a user (against account information that
most likely exists on some other accounting system entirely). That entry
point IS the Cloud Print Provider.  Yes, it most likely will redirect to
one of many CPSS.  By replacing the CPP with a CPR, you introduced
multiple semi-well-known endpoints (a valid model).   But the
information about registration and user account will not necessarily be
stored in your proposed CPR, nor should they.  I would expect a user to
be directed to a specific CPSS to get an enumerated list of available
CPSs.  That simple enumerated list of available CPSs may be considered
as sensitive information (some governments/corporations can be really
picky about the simplest amount of information).  So I still don't like
the term CPR as it's not really a registry.

 

Account may not (already) exist anyplace else expect the Cloud Print
Solution; if the Cloud entity is only Cloud Print (like Epson and HP).  

 

The entry point must be in a software entity (the Cloud Print Registry)
within the Cloud Print Provider.   If you really instead that the entry
point be """in""" the Cloud Print Provider then you must make the Cloud
Print Provider a software entity (a box in the diagram) and the cloud,
labeled Cloud Print Provider, becomes the Cloud Print Solution.  Also,
you must change the definition of the CPP from an environment to a
software entity (a service: Cloud Print Provider Service!!!!).

 

I believe you are really discussing implementation and deployment
details versus a model. 

Perhaps you are correct.  I was bringing in some implementation
thoughts.

 

In the end, life is in the details!!!!

 

</

I also don't like the idea of renaming the Cloud Print Provided as the
Cloud Print Registry, as registering a printer is only a small portion
of it job.  It does not register a user, rather it authenticates a user
account that was previously setup via a marketing/sale organization.  

/>

 

What does marketing/sales organization have to do with User
registration?  I did not go to my or Google's sales or marketing group
to register in the Google Cloud Print (Provider).   Or do you associate
a User with company.  Example, Ford Motor Company wants an HP Cloud
Print; so that sales and marketing provide the "User" (Ford) with an
account (actually, a complete Cloud Print Solution).   I believe the
term User means an individual but could be a group.   An indeed a CPR
could register Users; that is an implementation of the Cloud Print
Solution.  

 

Actually, you do.  When you go the Google web site to create an account,
you're dealing (indirectly) with Google's
marketing/Sales/WeWantYourNameAndEmailAddressSoWeCanMakeMoneyOffYou
department.  But, yes, I was also envisioning the model for corporate
accounts.  And, unless the entire service is free.  There is most
definitely a sales/accounting department involved in the creation of the
account.  Just because you use a web page to create an account doesn't
mean there's not a sales/marketing/accounting entity involved.

 

And I worry about how much information Google's (or anyone's)
marketing/Sales department are extracting.

 

Agreed that the sales/accounting department are the folks that sell the
service/solution but we need to finish the technical details (for them).

 

</

It does not register a Cloud Print System Service, rather it creates one
or more Cloud Print Systems as dictated by the same marketing/sales
organizations (based on customer requirements), with additional input
from an IT organization.  It does not even really register a printer,
rather it creates a Cloud-based Printer Service to receive and handle
jobs for that printer

/>

 

Again, I believe your model is that a Cloud Print System Service is
Cloud Print Bundle that is sold to companies.   While, I believe the
model, generically, describes any Cloud Print Solution.

 

We all understand (at least I hope so) that "Printer registration"
implies creation of a CPS representing the physical (maybe not even a
physical) printer.   If the CPSS creates CPS and it does not register
the CPS; then who does.  It makes perfect sense that if the CPSS
instantiates a CPS it should register is some data base.   And, since,
the CPSS (by definition) is supposed to enumerate CPS for a User; it
does have to have access to both a User data base and CPS data base and
association data for both the User and the collection of CPS's.

 

Creation = "registration" (or maybe it's better to say "Creation begets
registration".  The CPS cannot register itself, it is entered in
whatever passes for a "registration list" (a list of known CPS's) by the
CPSS when the CPSS creates the service instance.

Yes the CPSS does need to have access to the various databases.
However, I don't think those database should reside in the CPSS.  They
really belong to the CPP owner and its various (non-cloud?) support
systems.  

 

I still believe that the CPR replaces the CPSS; thus providing,
"Creation = 'registration'"

 

glen

________________________________

From: Murdock, Joe [mailto:jmurdock at sharplabs.com]
<mailto:%5bmailto:jmurdock at sharplabs.com%5d>  
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 12:21 PM
To: larryupthegrove; ptykodi at tykodi.com; Petrie, Glen
Cc: cloud at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

I don't agree with combine the Cloud Print Provider and the Cloud Print
System Service functionality.  

 

There is nothing to prevent, and actually a lot to recommend/require, a
Cloud Print Provider from supporting multiple Cloud Print System
Services, based on a variety of performance, contractual and legal
agreements/reasons.  It is not unusual that a customer's requirement for
a cloud service be that the customer's data never reside on or be
processed on a service that does not reside in a specified country.
With a multinational Cloud Print Provider, this would necessitate they
provide multiple Cloud Print System Services on multiple pieces of
physical hardware that resides in multiple countries).  In this
scenario, a user/company/printer/other service needs to have a well know
endpoint to start with (the Cloud Print Provider), from which it can be
redirect as necessary to the appropriate system service, and ultimately
the proper print service, based on information associated with a user's
account.  If we combine the Cloud Print Provider and the Cloud Print
System Service this account-base separation and redirection is no longer
possible.

 

I also don't like the idea of renaming the Cloud Print Provided as the
Cloud Print Registry, as registering a printer is only a small portion
of it job.  It does not register a user, rather it authenticates a user
account that was previously setup via a marketing/sale organization.  It
does not register a Cloud Print System Service, rather it creates one or
more Cloud Print Systems as dictated by the same marketing/sales
organizations (based on customer requirements), with additional input
from an IT organization.  It does not even really register a printer,
rather it creates a Cloud-based Printer Service to receive and handle
jobs for that printer

 

And yes, of course the term "Printer" in all of these diagrams should
really be read as "Imaging".  It may be appropriate to do that now, and
just limit the scope of Imaging to be printing for now.

 

 

From: cloud-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org]
<mailto:%5bmailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org%5d>  On Behalf Of
larryupthegrove
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 2:44 PM
To: ptykodi at tykodi.com; 'Petrie, Glen'
Cc: cloud at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

 

Glen raises some interesting points for the next discussion.  The
challenge is that the activities in the cloud are provider dependent, so
there could be a wide variety of implementations.  

 

I would like to leave client, but possibly add a cloud print client as
part of the association.  Long term I could see cloud print provider
becomes cloud imaging provider, and "print" gets replaced with "scan",
"fax", etc.  Then we can reuse a lot of the diagrams and work.

 

 

I updated the sequence drawings, adding a Print sequence and an
Enumeration sequence.

 

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/white/Cloud%20Print%20sequence%20drawing
supdate20120607.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/white/Cloud%20Print%20sequence%20drawing
supdate20120607.vsd

 

 

Larry Upthegrove

 

 

From: cloud-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org]
<mailto:%5bmailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org%5d>  On Behalf Of Paul Tykodi
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 1:05 PM
To: 'Petrie, Glen'
Cc: cloud at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

Hi Glen,

 

I like your choice of the name registry. I find myself continually
getting confused as to the actual tasks undertaken by some of the
components that live within the Cloud in our current model.

 

At least for me, the use of the word registry really helped with the
conceptual understanding.

 

Thanks.

 

Best Regards,

 

/Paul

--

Paul Tykodi
Principal Consultant
TCS - Tykodi Consulting Services LLC

Tel/Fax: 603-343-1820
Mobile:  603-866-0712
E-mail:  ptykodi at tykodi.com
WWW:  http://www.tykodi.com <http://www.tykodi.com/> 

From: cloud-bounces at pwgorg [mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org]
<mailto:%5bmailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org%5d>  On Behalf Of Petrie, Glen
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 12:05 PM
To: Petrie, Glen; William A Wagner; cloud at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

Bill,

 

In fact, considering the functions of the Cloud Print System Service,
the Cloud Print System Service should be called the Cloud Print
Registry.   This is where the User, Print Services, Transforms, etc are
registered.  It is the place where User-to-'Print Service' association
is done.   It is the place where a lot of the security and access
functionality is done (i.e User login, access token, etc.).   Now in the
model diagram, the arrow going to the "cloud-boundary" now go the Cloud
Print Registry. 

 

[ I believe using system service in the name here will be a big problem
later when we define an MFD and have the MFD system service.]

 

Glen

 

 

________________________________

From: Petrie, Glen 
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 7:46 AM
To: Petrie, Glen; 'William A Wagner'; 'cloud at pwg.org'
Subject: RE: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

Bill,

 

Can the methods of the Cloud Print Provider be moved to the Cloud Print
System Service; thus, leaving the Cloud Print Provider as an environment
(basically, the collection of all Cloud Print entities in a specific
cloud implementation).

 

Glen

 

 

________________________________

From: Petrie, Glen 
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 7:42 AM
To: Petrie, Glen; 'William A Wagner'; 'cloud at pwg.org'
Subject: RE: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

Bill,

 

Comment on Cloud Print Provider. 

 

In the current definition, the Cloud Print Provider is defined as an
environment but then it methods.   If the Cloud Print Provider provides
methods and can perform operations then it a software entity and not
just an environment. 

 

Glen

 

 

________________________________

From: cloud-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org]
<mailto:%5bmailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org%5d>  On Behalf Of Petrie, Glen
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 7:16 AM
To: William A Wagner; cloud at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

Bill,

 

I was reviewing the definition of the Client and I believe the Client
does not provide the association function.  It must be a Cloud entity,
such as the Cloud Provider or the Cloud Print Provider (i.e. Google
Cloud Print), that creates and maintains the association between the
User and one or more Printers (Cloud Print Services).  The Client
(acting as a proxy for the User) may or may-not actually display the
list of User Associated Printer Service (i.e. the Client may be an
embedded Client).

 

 

The Client is the software component that implements the interface
between the User and the Cloud Print Provider to create an Association;
and to enumerate available Cloud Print Services. The Client is also
implements the interface between the User and the selected Cloud Print
Service to submit a Print Job and to query Job and Printer Status. 

 

I would like to suggest the following 

 

The Client is the software proxy implementing an interface between the
User and the Cloud Print Provider for selection of a specific Cloud
Print Service from an enumeration list of User associated Cloud Print
Services .  The Client provides an interface for setting job elements
which are communicated with the specific Cloud Print Service  The Client
obtains and provided the User with job queries and Printer status.

 

I would like to also suggest that we name "Client" as "Cloud Print
Client" since this is a specific type of generic Client that provides
the interface specifically between the User and the Cloud Print
solution. 

 

Glen

 

 

________________________________

From: cloud-bounces at pwgorg <mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org>
[mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org]
<mailto:%5bmailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org%5d>  On Behalf Of William A
Wagner
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 7:34 PM
To: cloud at pwg.org
Subject: [Cloud] Updated Mapping and Model Drafts

 

Interim level, definitely work-in-progress drafts reflecting
considerations during the June face-to-face meeting are posted as
follows:

 

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudmap10-20120604.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudmap10-20120604-rev.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudmap10-20120604-rev.docx

 

and

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudmodel10-20120606.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudmodel10-20120606-rev.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudmodel10-20120606-rev.docx

 

Note that un-redlined versions of MS Word documents may be obtained from
redline versions.

 

Comments are appreciated.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill Wagner


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean. 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean. 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean. 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean. 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean. 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20120608/029dc9ea/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the cloud mailing list