IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for Notifications - Comments by April 15

IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for Notifications - Comments by April 15

IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for Notifications - Comments by April 15

don at lexmark.com don at lexmark.com
Mon Apr 1 12:50:39 EST 2002



I would go along with making ippget CONDITIONALLY mandatory, i.e. if a
notification method is supported, at least IPPGET must be.

**********************************************
 Don Wright                 don at lexmark.com

 Member, IEEE SA Standards Board
 Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
 f.wright at ieee.org / f.wright at computer.org

 Director, Alliances & Standards
 Lexmark International
 740 New Circle Rd
 Lexington, Ky 40550
 859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
**********************************************



"Carl" <carl%manros.com at interlock.lexmark.com> on 03/30/2002 04:30:08 PM

To:   "Carl" <carl%manros.com at interlock.lexmark.com>,
      ipp%pwg.org at interlock.lexmark.com
cc:    (bcc: Don Wright/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for Notifications - Comments by
      April 15



Resend, with spelling corrected etc. The earlier message slipped away before
I had finished it.

All,

Ned Freed communicated in an earlier message to the IPP WG, that the IESG
found it unacceptable that we had not choosen ONE mandatory delivery method
for notifications. They would also like to see that delivery method mandate
the use of security.

As those of you who were around about two years ago remember, we could not
reach agreement about mandating any of the delivery methods.

However, in the meantime the members of the IPPFAX project in the Printer
Working Group has reached an agreement that they will require all IPPFAX
implementions to implement the 'ippget' delivery method, and it also
requires support for TLS security.

Hence, I would like to put up the following strawman proposal to the IPP WG
members to satisfy the IESG comments:

1) Change the main Notifiction document to require that 'ippget' delivery
MUST be included for all notification implementations, but any of the other
two methods can also be implemented as an option.
<draft-ietf-ipp-not-spec-08.txt>

2) Put that rule also into the three delivery method documents, so it is
crystal clear what the rule is.
<draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-06.txt>
<draft-ietf-ipp-notify-mailto-04.txt>
<draft-ietf-ipp-indp-method-06.txt>

3) Further, in the 'ippget' delivery document, we specify that TLS security
MUST be supported.
<draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-06.txt>

If we can reach agreement on this, I will instruct the IPP editor to
implement these changes.

I would like to get your reactions back on this proposal no later than April
15, 2002.

Carl-Uno Manros
Chair of IETF IPP WG

10701 S Eastern Ave #1117
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Tel +1-702-617-9414
Fax +1-702-617-9417
Mob +1-310-251-7103
Email carl at manros.com










More information about the Ipp mailing list