IPP> What is it we really need?

IPP> What is it we really need?

IPP> What is it we really need?

Babak Jahromi babakj at MICROSOFT.com
Mon Jan 6 19:13:29 EST 1997


No, just make the IPP implementation easy enough, so most low end
printers can afford it. This again implies not re-inventing the wheel. I
also see nothing wrong with letting the server be hooked to Internet,
passing the data to the printer via USB, parallel port, Ethernet, etc. I
don't see a dying need for the printer boxes to be hoocked to the
Internet directly.


>----------
>From: 	Angelo_Caruso at wb.xerox.com[SMTP:Angelo_Caruso at wb.xerox.com]
>Sent: 	Monday, January 06, 1997 2:56 PM
>To: 	ipp at pwg.org
>Subject: 	RE: IPP> What is it we really need?
>
>Babak,
>
>I agree that a low-end printer can not be expected to provide the level 
> of job queueing and manipulation that a full blown server can provide. 
> But, ultimately one must transfer the job data to the "same old 
> printer box". How then do you propose we get the data to the printer? 
> Are you proposing that IPP be reserved for those customers who are 
> lucky enough to have a spare NT server off of which to run a parallel 
> cable to their printer?
>
>Angelo
>
>----------
>From: ipp-owner at pwg.org
>To: "'rdebry at us.ibm.com'"; "'Alex Bochannek'"
>Cc: Babak Jahromi; "'ipp at pwg.org'"
>Subject: RE: IPP> What is it we really need?
>Date: Monday, January 06, 1997 1:57PM
>
>>----------
>>From: 	Alex Bochannek[SMTP:abochann at cisco.com]
>>
>>Well, I think it became quite clear from Angelo's email, that the
>>largest number of implementors (the folks who write the printer code)
>>will most likely not have the option of using anything even close to a
>>"stock HTTP server". They probably have better tools to write code
>>straight to a socket API than to their own HTTP server
>>implementation. And I can tell you from very recent experience that
>>printing directly to a printer, circumventing the intermediate step of
>>a print server, is not only something that small shops do since at a
>>certain point, print severs just don't scale anymore.
>
>
>How can the squeezed, embedded server code in a printer box ever be a
>match for the kind of service a "print server implemented on a computer"
>can provide? We just saw an example of why a print server trapped inside
>a printer box can never match a print server inside a computer: The
>"printer" guys have to laboriously write ancient C code on top of TCP,
>while the "computer" guys have lavish tools and technology, like ISAPI,
>ActiveX, Java, Denali, etc. available on their "computer" platform.
>
>If anyone has solved a scaling problems with an NT 4.0 print server and
>has got a better performance by removing the server and routing the
>clients directly to the same old printer box, please send me the case
>study. 
>
>Babak
>>
>>
>



More information about the Ipp mailing list