I can see we're lost in the weeds here, again. The whole point
is (with or without an 'ipp:' scheme) to make the landmark
decision that we will NOT try to kludge security info as
parameters into a URL for an IPP Printer.
I suggested that we couple security to network directory services.
No directory services, no strong security info available.
Both Paul and Don has said SLPv1 (NOT SLPv2, in IESG Last Call)
made a mistake in thinking that the registration record keys
should be actual usable URL - well the whole darn WWW is
based on exactly that premise, so we must be talking past
each other here.
Too bad - because I see IPP/1.0 dying fast in the marketplace
because it never gets adopted onto the Internet 'standards
track'. Resolving the security debate and the (separable)
'ipp:' scheme debate with the IESG seemed like a high
priority to me. Good luck at the IETF Plenary in December.
You'll all need it.
Sorry my attempts at clarifications just muddied the waters,
- Ira McDonald (outside consultant at Xerox)
High North Inc