[IPP] RFC: Identify-Printer mini-extension

[IPP] RFC: Identify-Printer mini-extension

[IPP] RFC: Identify-Printer mini-extension

Ira McDonald blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Mon Dec 9 22:36:59 UTC 2013


Hi Smith,

Tricky.  The "identify action duration" would be a new attribute (which
would require a revision of JPS3 spec - yuck).

Mike's right that IPPSIX is the wrong place to do this - the conformance
shouldn't have anything to do with IPPSIX.

I also don't think that System Control Service should get into this business
- or maybe I'm crazy and that actually is the *right* place?  Should SCS,
rather than an individual service, be the target of this device-level
operation?

Someday, we need a lightweight IPP registration for whole new attributes
(in an existing attribute group), I suspect.

Cheers,
- Ira


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434



On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless Architect) <
smith.kennedy at hp.com> wrote:

> IMHO, these look fine.  I wonder if the “identify action duration” needs
> to be covered by something?  Does the System Control Service need to
> concern itself with this domain?
>
> Smith
>
>
>
> On 2013-12-09, at 12:53 PM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > During our last Cloud Imaging Model WG meeting, we discussed having the
> ability to explicitly cancel a previous Identify-Printer operation.  The
> consensus during that meeting was to add a new "identify-actions" keyword
> ('cancel') that would cancel any active identification mechanism.
> >
> > In addition, a new "printer-state-reasons" keyword
> ('identifying-printer' was proposed, although given the existing
> 'identify-printer-requested' value I like adding 'identify-printer-active'
> instead) would be added to allow a Client to discover whether a printer is
> currently identifying itself using an action other than 'cancel', which by
> definition stops any active identification and removes the new keyword from
> the "printer-state-reasons" attribute...
> >
> > The official registration would look like this:
> >
> >  Attributes (attribute syntax)
> >    Keyword Attribute Value                       Reference
> >    -----------------------                       ---------
> >  identify-actions (1setOf type2 keyword)         [PWG5100.13]
> >    cancel
> >
> >  printer-state-reasons (1setOf type2 keyword)    [RFC2911]
> >    identify-printer-active
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > (I considered adding this to IPPSIX, but since this has application
> outside of shared infrastructure/cloud deployments I think we should
> register it separately...)
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________
> > Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ipp mailing list
> > ipp at pwg.org
> > https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
> ipp at pwg.org
> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20131209/10fb5e7b/attachment.html>


More information about the ipp mailing list