IPP> Re: ADM - Draft minutes [client security issues]

IPP> Re: ADM - Draft minutes [client security issues]

IPP> Re: ADM - Draft minutes [client security issues]

Jay Martin jkm at underscore.com
Wed Dec 17 23:37:55 EST 1997


I've gotta say that I agree with Ira on the topic of mandatory
support for security.  Seems a bit extreme to require both ends
of a comm session to perform a relatively heavy security dance
when the customer does not wish to get involved with the
attendant administration.


	...jay


Ira Mcdonald x10962 wrote:


> My client s/w colleagues here at Xerox object STRONGLY to being told
> that the "interoperability" problem belongs to clients, so that they
> cannot build a simple client (without TLS) for intranet IPP printers
> and claim conformance.  The IETF ADs are just plain WRONG about this
> one!  Security should be a customer purchasing choice, not a "cost of
> doing business using Internet 'standards track' protocols"!  If IPP
> actually does supplant LPR in the enterprise network (as we all hope)
> MOST of the printers and clients will be configured WITHOUT security.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
--  JK Martin               |  Email:   jkm at underscore.com          --
--  Underscore, Inc.        |  Voice:   (603) 889-7000              --
--  41C Sagamore Park Road  |  Fax:     (603) 889-2699              --
--  Hudson, NH 03051-4915   |  Web:     http://www.underscore.com   --
----------------------------------------------------------------------



More information about the Ipp mailing list