IPP> RE: Comments on <draft-ietf-svrloc-printer-scheme-04.txt>

IPP> RE: Comments on <draft-ietf-svrloc-printer-scheme-04.txt>

IPP> RE: Comments on <draft-ietf-svrloc-printer-scheme-04.txt>

McDonald, Ira imcdonald at sharplabs.com
Thu Jan 6 19:01:31 EST 2000


Hi Ron,

Thanks for pointing out the typo...oof!

I tried to follow only the IPP/1.1 Model (June 1999),
so I didn't capture the other new 'finishings-supported'.
I could do so in the (obviously needed fixup.

The actual title of the I-D was set by Pete St. Pierre
(Sun) originally about 3 years ago.  I'm open to improving
it (with the approval of Pete and his cohort James Kempf).

The reason some 'printer:' template attributes are OPTIONAL
when they are RECOMMENDED or MANDATORY in IPP/1.1 Model is
that:
1)  OPTIONAL attributes can be given reliable well-known
    defaults by the template specification (and thus by
    the over-the-wire protocol).
2)  Hugo Parra (Novell) eloquently pointed out on numerous
    telecons and in email about a year ago that an outboard
    print manager (aka print server) might not be able to
    determine correct values for some of the MANDATORY
    attributes, so giving them well-known defaults of
    'unknown' was higher fidelity.
(Tom Hastings just called me with the same question).

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald (consulting architect at Sharp Labs America)
  High North Inc


-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Bergman [mailto:rbergma at hitachi-hkis.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2000 2:06 PM
To: ipp at pwg.org; Ira McDonald
Subject: Comments on <draft-ietf-svrloc-printer-scheme-04.txt>


Ira,

The title doesn't seem appropriate maybe
  "Definition of 'printer:' Service Type and Associated Attributes"

Page 5            "hostname    = *( domainlavel "." ) toplabel"
                                          ^^^^^
                  "hostname    = *( domainlabel "." ) toplabel

Page 11  (finishings-supported)  You have added the new items from the
         draft attribute values extension except for "fold, trim, and
         bale".  Was this intentional.

I don't disagree with your selections for required and optional but I am

curious as to why they are different from the Model, appendix E.  Could
this be a subject for discussion in a future phone conference?


    Ron Bergman
    Hitachi Koki Imaging Solutions




More information about the Ipp mailing list