Hi,
This morning's RFC Index shows IPP/1.1 (RFC 8010/8011) as "Internet
Standard"
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-index.html
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/blueroofmusichttp://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Jan-April: 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
May-Dec: PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:37 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>> Normally they just assign an STD number and update std-index.txt (for the
> RFC set)
> and rfc-index.txt (for Internet Standard status). Only when any *future*
> update of the
> RFCs happens would be any cover page change.
>> RFCs never state more than just "Standards Track" on their cover page and
> usually
> don't mention their own STD number (because an STD could become historic
> or
> deprecated via the underlying RFC status - although I think it's only
> happened once).
>> I expect to see IPP/1.1 update in the RFC Index web page w/in a few weeks.
>> 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> Jan-April: 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
> May-Dec: PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
>>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
>>> Smith,
>>>> I'm not sure about the timing - a lot depends on the RFC editor's load
>> and any editorial changes that we want to make. Ideally I'd like to just
>> have them assign STD numbers and change the status on the cover page
>> (minimal change) to speed this along... :)
>>>>>> On Jun 26, 2018, at 12:02 AM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards
>> Architec) <smith.kennedy at hp.com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the update, Mike! Given this status change for RFC 8011 (and
>> corresponding change for RFC 8010), when do we expect them to complete the
>> move to Internet Standard?
>>>> Smith
>>>> /**
>> Smith Kennedy
>> Wireless & Standards Architect - IPG-PPS
>> Standards - IEEE ISTO PWG / Bluetooth SIG / Wi-Fi Alliance / NFC
>> Forum / USB-IF
>> Chair, IEEE ISTO Printer Working Group
>> HP Inc.
>> */
>>>>>>>> On Jun 25, 2018, at 5:23 PM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
>>>> *Internet Standard*
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>> *From: *The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org>
>> *Subject: **Protocol Action: Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and
>> Semantics to Internet Standard*
>> *Date: *June 25, 2018 at 5:15:02 PM EDT
>> *To: *IETF-Announce <ietf-announce at ietf.org>
>> *Cc: *The IESG <iesg at ietf.org>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba at computer.org>,
>>draft-sweet-rfc2911bis at ietf.org, draft-sweet-rfc2910bis at ietf.org,
>>barryleiba at computer.org, rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org>> *Resent-From: *alias-bounces at ietf.org>> *Resent-To: *msweet at apple.com, blueroofmusic at gmail.com>>>> The IESG has approved changing the status of the following document:
>> - Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics
>> (rfc8011) to Internet Standard
>>>> This protocol action is documented at:
>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-change-ipp-to>> -internet-standard/
>>>> A URL of the affected document is:
>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8011/>>>> Status Change Details:
>>>> As specified in RFC 6410:
>>>> (1) There are at least two independent interoperating implementations
>> with widespread deployment and successful operational experience.
>>>> - Over 98% of all digital network printers shipped in the last
>> decade support IPP/1.1 (originally defined in RFC 2910/2911,
>> September 2000).
>>>> (2) There are no errata against the specification that would cause a
>> new implementation to fail to interoperate with deployed ones.
>>>> - There are currently no errata against RFC 8010/8011.
>>>> (3) There are no unused features in the specification that greatly
>> increase implementation complexity.
>>>> - There are no unused features in RFC 8010/8011.
>>>> - The Purge-Jobs operation (from RFC 2911) is DEPRECATED in
>> RFC 8011 (page 73) with "SHOULD NOT support" because it
>> destroys Printer accounting implementation. This operation
>> has never been widely implemented in digital network printers.
>>>> - The Restart-Job operation (from RFC 2911) is DEPRECATED in
>> RFC 8011 (page 89) with "SHOULD NOT support" because it
>> destroys Printer accounting implementation. This operation
>> has never been widely implemented in digital network printers.
>>>> (4) If the technology required to implement the specification
>> requires patented or otherwise controlled technology, then the
>> set of implementations must demonstrate at least two independent,
>> separate and successful uses of the licensing process.
>>>> - There is no patented or otherwise controlled technology that
>> is required to implement IPP/1.1 per RFC 8010/8011.
>>>> Personnel
>>>> Alexey Melnikov is the responsible Area Director.
>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________
>> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> ipp mailing list
>>ipp at pwg.org>>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________
>> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180628/647e5113/attachment.html>