IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?

Re: IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?

Robert Herriot (Robert.Herriot@Eng.Sun.COM)
Thu, 4 Sep 1997 18:31:46 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Jay Martin: "Re: IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?"
Previous message: Scott Isaacson: "Re: IPP> MOD/PRO - Proposal to add 'dictionary' attribute"
Maybe in reply to: Robert Herriot: "IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?"
Next in thread: Jay Martin: "Re: IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?"

> From papowell@astart.com Thu Sep 4 17:52:06 1997

>
> Umm... you are assuming that the LPD gateway would need to use
> job numbers? I just checked the RFC1179 and it appears that
> the term 'number' is really 'identifier'. Thus the URI could be
> the identifier. Now classically we have been using the
> "numerical portion of the control/data identifier" as the job number.

Yes, I am assuming a gateway which talks to REAL LPD print systems,
which all use integer identifiers. I don't believe I need to plan for
hypothetical RFC1179 gateways which might use something else.

Next message: Jay Martin: "Re: IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?"
Previous message: Scott Isaacson: "Re: IPP> MOD/PRO - Proposal to add 'dictionary' attribute"
Maybe in reply to: Robert Herriot: "IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?"
Next in thread: Jay Martin: "Re: IPP>MOD Why use Job-Id instead of Job-URI for Jobs?"