IPP> Re: Inconsistency with REQUESTED attributes [I don't think its

IPP> Re: Inconsistency with REQUESTED attributes [I don't think its

IPP> Re: Inconsistency with REQUESTED attributes [I don't think its

Tom Hastings hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com
Tue Dec 16 12:22:11 EST 1997


Harry,


I thought of a why this inconsistency is a useful feature for IPP.  
(The inconsistency is that k octets and impressions requested 
don't take account of the number of copies while media requested does.
See Harry's attached mail).


In IPP the job-k-octets, job-impressions, and job-media-sheets
have corresponding Printer attributes: job-k-octets-supported,
job-impressions-supported, and job-media-sheets-supported.
These three xxx-supported attributes have an integer range value
which is a lower bound and an upper bound on the allowed values
for the job-k-octets, job-impressions, and job-media-sheets job
attributes.  This allows the system administrator some control
over preventing too small or two large jobs from being accepted.


By making job-media-sheets, include copies, but job-k-octets and
job-impressions, not include copies, the system administrator is
able to limit the size of documents and the size of jobs. 


So he/she can say, no more that 100 sheets (whether one- or two-sided
and no matter how many copies) will be accepted.  Thus controlling cost
of media.  Also not less than n, for a high volume printer.


Then he/she can limit the size of the document(s), independent of the number
of copies, by picking the value for job-k-octets-supported and 
job-impressions-supported (which correspond to the Job MIB
jmJobKOctetsPerCopyRequested and jmJobImpressionsPerCopyRequested objects).


So I think we have a good reason to be different between K octets/impressions
requested versus media requested.  And happily, both IPP and Job Mon
have this same difference, so lets keep IPP and Job Mon as they are
and in agreement with each other (since we are trying to forward both 
documents as I-Ds to the IESG this week to become standard track and
informational RFC, respectively).


Ok?


Tom


>From: Harry Lewis <harryl at us.ibm.com>
>To: <jmp at pwg.org>, <ipp at pwg.org>
>Subject: IPP> Inconsistency with REQUESTED attributes
>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 18:02:21 PST
>Sender: ipp-owner at pwg.org
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by
garfield.cp10.es.xerox.com id SAA23815
>
>I think we have a consistency problem with attributes job-impressions and
>job-media-sheets. The inconsistency exists in both JMP and IPP. Most
attributes
>that reflect a REQUESTED value are based on the "unit" of one copy of the
job.
>For instance, job-impressions (requested) is specifically PER COPY. Sheets,
>however, for some reason, is defined to pertain to all the sheets in all the
>copies in the job. There seems to be no good reason for this and I request
that
>we adjust sheets back to a unit base like other attributes. If an application
>wants to calculate load they can multiply sheets by copies... like with any
>other requested attribute.
>
>Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems
>
>



More information about the Ipp mailing list