[IPP] Proposed errata for rfc3998

[IPP] Proposed errata for rfc3998

Zehler, Peter Peter.Zehler at xerox.com
Wed Nov 16 11:12:41 UTC 2011


All,

 

Section 10.8.2 covering "original-requesting-user-name" is a bit
misleading.  The issue is that the Job owner is not always the same as
the  "requesting-user-name".   When forwarding jobs from one printer to
another the "original-requesting-user-name" is the most authenticated
printable name that can be obtained.  As stated in section 10.8.8 of
rfc3998:  "The "job-originating-user-name" Job Description attribute
(see [RFC2911], section 4.3.6) remains as the authenticated original
user".  This is inconsistent with section 10.8.2 as currently written.
Below is my proposed change to section 10.8.2.

 

Original:

10.8.2.  original-requesting-user-name (name(MAX)) Operation and Job

        Description Attribute

 

   The operation attribute containing the user name of the original

   user; i.e., corresponding to the "requesting-user-name" operation

   attribute (see [RFC2911], section 3.2.1.1) that the original client

   supplied to the first Printer object.  The Printer copies the

   "original-requesting-user-name" operation attribute to the

   corresponding Job Description attribute.

 

Corrected:

10.8.2.  original-requesting-user-name (name(MAX)) Operation and Job

        Description Attribute

 

   The operation attribute containing the user name of the original

   user; i.e., corresponding to the "job-originating-user-name" Job

   attribute (see [RFC2911], section 4.3.6) that identifies the Job

   owner on the first Printer object.  The Printer copies the

   "original-requesting-user-name" operation attribute to the

   corresponding Job Description attribute.

 

 

Peter Zehler

Xerox Research Center Webster
Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com <mailto:Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com> 
Voice: (585) 265-8755
FAX: (585) 265-7441
US Mail: Peter Zehler
Xerox Corp.
800 Phillips Rd.
M/S 128-25E
Webster NY, 14580-9701 

 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20111116/859b815c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ipp mailing list