>>For the Redirect-Job, the "redirection-printers-supported" Printer
>>is all that is necessary for a Printer to indicate to which other
>>it is willing to redirect output. We don't need to introduce a Server
>>object to help with the simple Redirect-Job that redirects jobs among
>>Printers on the same server.
>>>Then I don't think you need to introduce a little 's' "server", either.
>It's an implementation detail whether or not the
>"redirection-printers-supported" are on the same server. You only need to
>specify the protocol. If an implementation can meet the spec, it doesn't
>matter how it does it. You don't need to specify an architecture
>a "server". (If there is a reason that "server" is important, then I'm
>still not getting it.)
>>TH> I think you are getting it. We don't need to introduce the concept of
>"server" at all for Redirect-Job. All that is necessary is that a Printer
>(object) be able to enumerate the Printers to which it is willing to
>redirect a job. A Printer indicates this list in the values of its
>This then brings us back around to my original point, which is that this
wording in the spec is too restrictive:
> This operation is limited to redirecting a job to another
> Printer on the same server.
For example, in our case, we should be able to redirect a Job to any
Printer on a server that's in the same "namespace" (or "cell"), even though
a namespace may contain multiple servers.