If it is a URI, then the URI determines the method for "fetching". We
do not need to do anything to IPP to define a new way to fetch.
If it is an HTTP URI, do a GET on the URL
If it is an FTP URI, use FTP, etc.
I don't see an URI like "ipp://..." being used.
I had thought about what Scott L. was suggesting about having an
attribute describe the whether the Printer supported print-by-reference
or not. What if we made this like "notification-addresses-supported" which
is a list of URI schemes that are supported by the Printer.?
Scott
************************************************************
Scott A. Isaacson
Print Services Consulting Engineer
Novell Inc., 122 E 1700 S, Provo, UT 84606
V: (801) 861-7366, (800) 453-1267 x17366
F: (801) 861-4025, E: scott_isaacson@novell.com
W: http://www.novell.com
************************************************************
>>> Roger K Debry <rdebry@us.ibm.com> 05/30 7:00 AM >>>
So far we have said (rightly or wrongly) that the actual fetch
of the actual fetch of the referenced document was outside the
scope of IPP. For example, an implementation might use FTP
to retrieve a document. If this were the case, then don't we still
get by with just an origin server? Do you thinnk we need to add
the fetch to IPP and use HTTP for this?
Roger K deBry
Senior Techncial Staff Member
Architecture and Technology
IBM Printing Systems
email: rdebry@us.ibm.com
phone: 1-303-924-4080
---------------------- Forwarded by Roger K Debry/Boulder/IBM on 05/30/97
06:52
AM ---------------------------
ipp-owner @ pwg.org
05/30/97 06:55 AM
Please respond to ipp-owner@pwg.org @ internet
To: jkm @ underscore.com @ internet
cc: ipp @ pwg.org @ internet
Subject: Re: IPP>PRO - Print by reference
>>>>> "JK" == JK Martin <jkm@underscore.com> writes:
JK> We also readily agree with Roger's belief that print-by-reference
JK> should be considered a basic (ie, mandatory) requirement for IPP.
One objection that was raised to the use of HTTP as a 'transport'
was that it might require substantial complexity. In response, I
among others pointed out that only the 'origin server' requirements
of HTTP would apply. If print-by-reference is a MUST, then most of
the HTTP client requirements would be equally applicable.
As I said before, I believe that specifying how this works if
present is a very good idea, but I believe that whether or not to
put this feature in any given product should be a choice left to the
vendor.
This strikes me as an easy feature to describe as a very small set
of attributes which describe whether or not print-by-reference is
supported and if so what identity the printer is configured to use
and any network access restrictions it may have.