IPP> Review of Additional Operations - Set 1

IPP> Review of Additional Operations - Set 1

IPP> Review of Additional Operations - Set 1

Ron Bergman rbergma at dpc.com
Wed Aug 12 11:06:41 EDT 1998


Sorry for the delay of this review.  (The document was published after I
left for vacation.)

1.  The format of the text version will need some work before it can be
    sent to the IETF.  It is unfortunate that they cannot accept WORD or
    PDF files, but there is not much we can do but generate "clean" text

2.  On page #1, the name of my employer is spelled incorrectly.

3.  On page #3, section 1, the first line following the section title just
    repeats what has already been stated in the title.  This line could be
    removed with no loss of content.  (minor nit!)

4.  In section 2.3 (Restart-Job), the job state is shown in the table as
    changing from "processing-stopped" to "processing" and the operation
    is rejected.  The job state should remain as "processing-stopped".

5.  Also in section 2.3 (Restart-Job), I disagree with your discussion
    concerning accounting applications.  You are making an assumption
    that an accounting application will be able to recognize that the job
    was restarted if a new set of accounting information is pushed from
    the printer.  This is not true for any accounting packages that I am
    familiar with.  When the accounting package receives the data set for
    the reprinted job it will most likely do one one of two things; 1) it
    will recognize that information has been received for the job and 
    discard the new data, assuming that this was a duplicate packet or 
    2) just overwrite the original data.  I do not believe that any
    accounting package would recognize that the job was reprinted and
    act as stated in your text.  How would the application know the
    difference between a duplicate packet and the scenario that you
    proposed?  I believe that we agreed in Monterey that the Restart-Job
    would not be compatible with accounting applications and that a simple
    note similar to the following would be added:

    "NOTE: Resetting the job progress attributes should allow a job
     monitoring application to function unchanged for a job that has been
     restarted.  However, since the job-id for the "restarted-job" is
     identical to the original job, this operation will most likely be
     incompatible with accounting applications.  It is recommended that
     the Reprocess-Job operation be used when accurated accounting data
     is desired."

With these changes incorporated, we should have a document that reflects
the agreements per the Monterey meeting.

	Ron Bergman
	Dataproducts Corp.

More information about the Ipp mailing list