[SM3] [IPP] Proposed definition of "protocol binding"

[SM3] [IPP] Proposed definition of "protocol binding"

Ira McDonald blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Thu Aug 14 12:51:29 UTC 2014


Hi Mike,

I like your definitions better.

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 Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:

> Ira,
>
> I dislike using the term in the definition - makes for circular
> definitions. Seems like we are talking about a transport mechanism.
>
> And while we do normally focus on networking the existence of IPP USB also
> can allow non-traditional data paths to use our stuff.
>
> Finally, "attributes" has specific meaning in both IPP and XML, so how
> about "data elements"?
>
> That would make the definition:
>
> Protocol Binding: The combination of a transport mechanism with a set of
> message formats, operations, and data elements that implement an abstract
> information model and associated set of abstract operations and data
> elements.
>
>
> and for the IPP Binding definition in IPP Scan and IPPINFRA:
>
> IPP Binding: The Internet Printing Protocol implementation of an abstract
> information model and associated set of abstract operations and data
> elements.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2014, at 9:05 PM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> There are hundreds of self-contradictory, informal definitions
> of "protocol binding" around the Internet.  Many IETF RFCs
> use this term just as we do in PWG, but none define it (that
> I've found so far).
>
> The following excerpt from WSDL/1.1 is illustrative of the
> conventional computer science use of "protocol binding":
>
> "Abstract: WSDL is an XML format for describing network
> services as a set of endpoints operating on messages
> containing either document-oriented or procedure-oriented
> information. The operations and messages are described
> abstractly, and then bound to a concrete network protocol
> and message format to define an endpoint. Related concrete
> endpoints are combined into abstract endpoints (services).
> WSDL is extensible to allow description of endpoints and
> their messages regardless of what message formats or
> network protocols are used to communicate."
>
> Thus, my proposed definition:
>
>
> Protocol Binding:  The combination of a network protocol
> with a set of message formats, operations, and attributes
> that constitutes a concrete data model for implementation
> of an abstract information model and an associated set of
> abstract operations and attributes.
>
>
> The above definition fits the usage of this term in every
> IETF RFC that I looked at this evening (several dozen).
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
> ipp at pwg.org
> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
>
>


More information about the sm3 mailing list