IPP> RE: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status code from IPPGET

IPP> RE: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status code from IPPGET

IPP> RE: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status code from IPPGET

McDonald, Ira imcdonald at sharplabs.com
Fri Aug 2 12:43:38 EDT 2002


Hi Harry,

If you feel we've got to have operation-specific (that is, IPP layer)
redirect, then we do.  I _suspect_ that the IESG won't like it and it
will slow down the IPPGET spec (and thus delay the whole IPP Notifications
set of specs, because Ned Freed says he only wants to do them together).

I do think we should generalize the definition of the redirect attribute
to make clear that it's a new general feature to IPP implementations.
And then (if we keep it), we may as well just say that IPP Printers
MAY implement this (optional) response attribute and IPP Clients MAY
(_not_ MUST) follow the redirect (Clients can choose instead to abandon
the whole effort).

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald

PS - I agree about the polling cycle - I think it's amazing there's been
this much response!


-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 11:06 PM
To: Robert Herriot
Cc: Hastings, Tom N; McDonald, Ira; ipp at pwg.org; 'Mike Sweet';
Ron.Bergman at Hitachi-hkis.com; Ted Tronson
Subject: Re: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status code from
IPPGET



While I respect Bob's, Ira's, Ted's (and other's) opinions the conversation
sure seems to have adopted an arbitrary tone w.r.t. to IPP bells, whistles
and trinkets. If someone says they can use a simple feature like redirect I
see no need to block it. If it were mind bending I would argue otherwise...
but  redirect is quite simple by any gauge and doesn't even register on the
scale of numbness many feel when first confronting IPP. 

Notification redirect should consist of writing the client to accept a URL
(in place of the printer URL) where it should expect to find subsequent
notifications. 

I can always feature the redirect... so I guess I'm going down for last
count w/o a big struggle. I don't  think Bob is correct in attributing lack
of chatter as lack of significance. I think the spotlight is off IPP and you
are witnessing the polling interval.  
---------------------------------------------- 
Harry Lewis 
IBM Printing Systems 
---------------------------------------------- 


"Robert Herriot" <bob at herriot.com> 
07/31/2002 03:05 AM         
        To:        "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com>, "'Mike Sweet'"
<mike at easysw.com>, "Hastings, Tom N" <hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com> 
        cc:        Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM at IBMUS,
<Ron.Bergman at Hitachi-hkis.com>, "Ted Tronson" <TTRONSON at novell.com>,
"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com>, <ipp at pwg.org> 
        Subject:        Re: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and
status code from IPPGET 

       


Harry says that redirect is simple to implement. I agree, but implementation
is only part of the issue.
Each feature requires documentation, testing and support. There is no such
thing as a free feature.

Very few people have responded to this issue and no one has said that it is
a necessary feature.

So, it would seem hard to justify keeping a feature that.seems to have no
value to anyone, but does have a cost to every vendor.

Bob Herriot

----- Original Message -----
From: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com>
To: "'Mike Sweet'" <mike at easysw.com>; "Hastings, Tom N"
<hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com>
Cc: "Harry Lewis" <harryl at us.ibm.com>; <Ron.Bergman at Hitachi-hkis.com>; "Ted
Tronson" <TTRONSON at novell.com>; "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com>;
"Robert Herriot" <bob at herriot.com>; <ipp at pwg.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 8:46 PM
Subject: RE: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status code from
IPPGET


> Hi,
>
> If we keep it, remember it can be OPTIONAL to use but MUST be REQUIRED
> to support (for the Client - that is, IPP Clients MUST honor and use
> the redirect).
>
> Does everyone want a new REQUIRED to implement application redirect
> feature (for IPP Clients)?
>
> I doubt it very much.  And that's the test that the IESG will apply,
> for interoperability.
>
> Cheers,
> - Ira McDonald
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Sweet [mailto:mike at easysw.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:09 PM
> To: Hastings, Tom N
> Cc: Harry Lewis; Ron.Bergman at Hitachi-hkis.com; Ted Tronson; McDonald,
> Ira; Robert Herriot; ipp at pwg.org
> Subject: Re: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status code
> from IPPGET
>
>
> Hastings, Tom N wrote:
>  > ...
>  > Could the six commenters (see the To: line) who agreed to remove
>  > redirection, please respond as to whether they are still in favor of
>  > deleting the Get-Notifications redirection or that they are now
>  > willing to keep Get-Notifications redirection in the IPPGET spec in
>  > case someone wants to implement IPPGET with a Notification Server.
>
> If we keep it, we probably do need a redirect timeout parameter, or
> to define what should happen if the redirect server doesn't handle the
> notification...
>
>  > As Bob asks, is anyone planning to use a Notification Server or think
>  > that they might want to?
>
> We're not planning to.
>
> --
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products                  mike at easysw.com
> Printing Software for UNIX                       http://www.easysw.com
>
>



More information about the Ipp mailing list