Some reactions to the draft:
I thought that finding shared documents, as identified in the first
sentence, would be left to other web-oriented groups and that IPP was
concerned with locating and using output devices. Since the statement
says that locating shared documents is part of internet printing, it
suggests that it is part of the IPP project. I would suggest dropping
the reference to shared documents.
I did not expect the strong statement with regard to authentication,
authorization, etc. Is this regarded as primary (shall) to the group's
I was surprised by the very tentative "may define work that will
replace RFC 1159". I thought this was a definite objective and one
with which IP printing users could identify.
Bill Wagner, DPI
IETF Internet Printing Protocol (ipp) WG
Carl-Uno Manros <manros at cp10.es.xerox.com>
Applications Area Director(s):
Keith Moore <moore at cs.utk.edu>
Harald Alvestrand <Harald.T.Alvestrand at uninett.no>
Mailing List Information:
General Discussion: <ipp at pwg.org>
To Subscribe: <ipp-request at pwg.org>
Scott Isaacson <scott_isaacson at novell.com>
Description of Working Group:
Internet printing involves using Internet technologies and services
to find networked resources such as printers and shared documents and
then printing using those resources.
The goal of this working group is to define a new application level
distributed printing protocol as well as defining naming and service
registration attributes for printing. The protocol shall support a
global, distributed environment where print service users (clients,
applications, drivers, etc.) cooperate and interact with print service
providers (servers, printers, gateways, etc.).
The working group shall leverage existing (and emerging) technologies
for: authentication, authorization, privacy, and commercial transactions.
For location of printers, the working group shall leverage existing
standards for directories and emerging standards for service location.
The working group shall coordinate its activities with other
printing-related standards bodies.
The working group shall define solutions that do not preclude the
notion of multi-tiered configurations consisting of both logical and
physical printers. Also, the new job submission protocol should not
preclude submitting jobs to any type of output device (e.g., fax,
printer, gateway). Also, the working group shall define extensibility
paths so that similar extensions will interoperate and proprietary,
dissimilar extensions will never conflict.
This working group may define work that will replace RFC 1179 'Line
Printer Daemon Protocol'. LPR/LPD was designed a long time ago with
line printers in mind. It does not fit with current page oriented
Deliverables and Milestones:
Mailing list and archive
November 1996 - Submit first set of Internet-Drafts
December 1996 - BOF in IETF meeting in San Jose, CA, USA
March 1997 - Submit Internet-Drafts
April 1997 - Review of specification in IETF meeting in Memphis, TN, USA
May 1997 - At least 2 implemented protypes
May 1997 - Submit document to the IESG for Proposed Standard
No Current Internet-Drafts
701 S. Aviation Blvd.
El Segundo, CA 90245, USA
E-mail: manros at cp10.es.xerox.com