[IPP] New draft of IPP Authentication Methods posted

[IPP] New draft of IPP Authentication Methods posted

Ira McDonald blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Wed Jan 16 20:18:20 UTC 2019


Hi Mike,

Prototype is not required for a Best Practice, but it's been done.

NOTHING in Process/3.0 or our PWG tradition says that, in fact,
everything has to be prototyped.  A simple email from Smith that
says what HP has implemented would be a plus.  Apple CUPS
has certainly done 'negotiate' and 'certificate' right?  What about
'oauth'?

But specs that get Formal Vote do need to go Interim --> Prototype
--> Stable (and not just LC/Vote on Interim).   I'd be happy to say that
the current draft was *meant* to be Prototype and voice vote it into
Stable for WG LC.

Cheers,
- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Co-Chair - TCG Metadata Access Protocol SG
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
PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434



On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 2:09 PM Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:

> Ira,
>
> I don’t think Process/3.0 requires prototyping for non-standards track
> documents. All I see is a prototyping requirement for candidate standards.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 16, 2019, at 12:22 PM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards
> Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ira,
>
> On Jan 16, 2019, at 10:05 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Smith,
>
> This *should* have been labeled Prototype (not current Interim)
>
>
> I remembered that when I started editing but forgot to change it. I will
> that change and post an updated draft to nudge that forward.
>
> and there
> should be an email Prototype report (e.g.,"this spec documents all of the
> existing IPP Authentication Methods, all of which have implementations")
> so that, by voice approval, we can move it to Stable draft and WG LC.
>
>
> I know HP products have supported 'none', 'requesting-user-name', 'basic',
> and 'digest'. I suppose I need to solicit feedback from other members on
> whether the authentication methods not implemented by HP might be
> implemented by them? Has any other vendor or project implemented support
> for 'negotiate', 'oauth', or 'certificate'?
>
>
> Bear in mind that, for a Best Practices document, we actually also need
> PWG LC *and* PWG Formal Vote (not just PWG Call for Objections),
> because this is a new spec and not errata and that's our process for
> Best Practices documents.
>
>
> Thanks - I forgot about that. Even better reason to finish it off.
>
>
> Cheers,
> - Ira
>
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Metadata Access Protocol SG
> 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
> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/kkl1Cqx5v5uYOlwpiZjrr9?domain=sites.google.com>
> http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/6kLeCrk5w5fQAoJ5tz_F-q?domain=sites.google.com>
> mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com
> PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 3:45 PM Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards
> Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com> wrote:
>
>> Greetings again,
>>
>> I'm hoping that we can discuss using this revision to start the Working
>> Group Last Call. I'd like to discuss that at this week's IPP WG
>> teleconference.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Smith
>>
>> /**
>>     Smith Kennedy
>>     HP Inc.
>> */
>>
>> On Jan 9, 2019, at 8:52 AM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards
>> Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com> wrote:
>>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I've posted another incremental draft of IPP Authentication Methods to
>> the PWG FTP site:
>>
>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109.pdf
>> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/31gpCv25A5hwWKVDtzMnAi?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109.odt
>> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/aDqhCwp5B5IlL9rDtKc97H?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109-rev.pdf
>> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/9N7YCxk5D5fEJwN2tRnLQj?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109-rev.odt
>> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/V84ZCyP5E5uONkVltAlOXd?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>>
>> This revision adds mention of the "oauth-authorization-server-uri"
>> Printer Description attribute and a reference to PWG 5100.18 (IPP INFRA)
>> since that attribute is listed in the sequence diagram. The -rev is
>> compared against the last reviewed revision (20181109).
>>
>> Smith
>>
>> /**
>> Smith Kennedy
>> HP Inc.
>> */
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ipp mailing list
>> ipp at pwg.org
>> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
>> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/Kp0_Czp5G5IWR9V0CBcuVp?domain=pwg.org>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ipp mailing list
>> ipp at pwg.org
>> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
>> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/Kp0_Czp5G5IWR9V0CBcuVp?domain=pwg.org>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20190116/75063e9a/attachment.html>


More information about the ipp mailing list