IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> PRO - Updated "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols"

Re: IPP> PRO - Updated "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols"

Robert Herriot (Robert.Herriot@Eng.Sun.COM)
Tue, 15 Jul 1997 11:43:23 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Scott Isaacson: "Re: IPP> MOD - Questions on IPP Model and Protocol Document"
Previous message: Scott Isaacson: "IPP> MOD - blind rev of the model documet"
Maybe in reply to: Tom Hastings: "IPP> PRO - Updated "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols""
Next in thread: JK Martin: "Re: IPP> PRO - Updated "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols""

> From jkm@underscore.com Tue Jul 15 10:11:10 1997

> Line 298: "...we need to map the LPD query format to IPP attributes."
> What is meant by the "LPD query format"? In LPD, the client asks for
> either the "short" or the "long" version of a query; no further
> granularity is available, right?
>
>
> I think all the LPD syntax stuff in the document is confusing (at best)
> and adds little to the overall value of the document. The syntax is
> described in a different form than that of RFC 1179 (which has no form,
> actually). All that is needed in this mapping document are references
> to the appropriate terms and section numbers of RFC 1179; it should be
> more than sufficient to assume the reader has knowledge of RFC 1179,
> and that this mapping document should not "spoon-feed" the reader.

I was referring to the format of the long and short response which PSIS
but not RFC 1179 specifies.

Next message: Scott Isaacson: "Re: IPP> MOD - Questions on IPP Model and Protocol Document"
Previous message: Scott Isaacson: "IPP> MOD - blind rev of the model documet"
Maybe in reply to: Tom Hastings: "IPP> PRO - Updated "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols""
Next in thread: JK Martin: "Re: IPP> PRO - Updated "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols""