IPP Mail Archive: RE: Re[2]: IPP> Notifications

RE: Re[2]: IPP> Notifications

Turner, Randy (rturner@sharplabs.com)
Wed, 4 Feb 1998 17:02:56 -0800

I am unconvinced that UDP is unsuitable for an internet solution for
notification. Currently, administrators keep on a tight rein on
applications entering a firewall. Josh stated in the last meeting that
administrators want a finer granularity on what they secure coming in
through firewalls to internal networks. If we define (and register,
through IANA) a particular UDP port for IPP notifications, then if an
administrator wanted to allow this type of service, then he/she would
enable it; just like any other application.

Randy

-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [SMTP:harryl@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 1998 1:10 PM
To: ipp@pwg.org
Subject: Re: Re[2]: IPP> Notifications

Philip brings up an important issue which will continue to cloud
our
discussion of Notifications unless we understand it.

>I don't see how a UDP datagram originating from outside
the firewall
>is going to be let inside (without assigning a special
port, and
>security protocol).

>Of course, if we are dealing only with the Intranet, there
are many easy
>solutions.

>Philip Thambidurai

When we discuss notifications, I think some of us have different
ideas
based on whether we are thinking primarily Intranet or Internet
When thinking
Internet, an e-mail message for job complete is appropriate and
acceptable.
Here,
I agree with the recommendations to investigate similar
approaches in I-Fax.

If you consider IPP as possibly the most prevalent way to submit
print
jobs on ANY network in the future, then I think a much more
granular and
streamline method should be considered.

In PWG IPP, we need to address BOTH!

Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems