IPP Mail Archive: IPP> Re: Suggested workplan - host to device protocol

IPP Mail Archive: IPP> Re: Suggested workplan - host to device protocol

IPP> Re: Suggested workplan - host to device protocol

don@lexmark.com
Tue, 17 Feb 1998 10:23:46 -0500

Roger deBry said:

>Assertions:
>
>(1) IPP, as it is currently defined, is the correct protocol
> for client to server, across the Internet.
>
>(2) IPP, as it is currently defined, is the correct protocol
> for client to server, across an Intranet
>
>(3) IPP, as it is currently defined, is the correct protocol
> between a server and a printer which contains an
> imbedded server.

I can easily agree with Roger on #1 and #2. I think where
the problem lies is with #3. I am not sure how broad the
definition of "imbedded server" is? Does that mean imbedded
IPP server or any server? All of my network printers today
have available what we call an Internal Print Server which
supports a wide range of protocols. Is that what you mean
Roger? I don't think so. I think the definition needs to
be "imbedded, spooling print server." And even then, I think
we have lost a huge amount of control and status information
that is available from TIPSI or even SNMP. Maybe we need
to define some kind of passthrough for IPP that allows
the control and status information for the down and dirty
hardware to be retrieved and set through IPP??

Comments?

**********************************************
* Don Wright don@lexmark.com *
* Product Manager, Strategic Alliances *
* Lexmark International *
* 740 New Circle Rd *
* Lexington, Ky 40550 *
* 606-232-4808 (phone) 606-232-6740 (fax) *
**********************************************