Notes taken by Lee Farrell
Attendees:
Ron Bergman Dataproducts
Lee Farrell Canon Information Systems
Tom Hastings Xerox
Daniel Manchala Xerox
Carl-Uno Manros Xerox
Larry Masinter Xerox
Ira Mcdonald High North
Randy Turner Sharp
Don Wright Lexmark
Steve Zilles Adobe
Carl-Uno Manros led the meeting. For today's agenda topic, he said that
he would like to review some of the new Internet-Drafts from other IETF
Working Groups that might impact the implementation of IPP. We should
decide if we need to comment on some of these drafts in the IETF LA
meeting.
He also hoped to have discussion about the IPP test suite, but Peter
Zehler did not join the teleconference.
Harlequin has announced that they be showing a preliminary IPP server for
their ScriptWorks product at Seybold this week. If somebody is visiting
Seybold in NY this week, please give feedback in next week's phone
conference.
We still have no feedback from IESG. As far as Carl-Uno can tell, Keith
Moore (IETF Area Director) is still reading the documents and thinking
about comments. Because the IESG is not meeting again until after the LA
IETF meeting, we might not have any official statement on the status of
the documents at the LA meeting, but we might get some preliminary feedback
in time for LA.
The group then discussed comments on any of the Internet-Drafts that
have recently surfaced?
HTTP -
draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-rev-03.txt: Page 144-146 list the updates to
the HTTP/1.1 document RFC 2068. It didn't seem that anyone had read the
document - or at least no one had comments on it. Steve Zilles said that
the HTTP Working Group is not planning to have any more meetings, but
they are not yet complete with their interoperability testing.
draft-ietf-http-ext-mandatory-00.txt: Another document that Carl-Uno
discovered is called "Mandatory Extensions to HTTP" lists some additions
to HTTP/1.1. Should this be called HTTP/1.2? Carl-Uno will investigate
this apparent oxymoron. It appears that the document discusses methods
for extending HTTP (similar to PEP-Protocol Extension Protocol.)
Carl-Uno believes that the document is not relevant to IPP.
Larry Masinter explained that there will be a separate Working Group
formed to address HTTP extensions. The document will be updated as part
of the new Working Group activity.
draft-ietf-http-authentication-01.txt: This is an update of RFC 2069,
and only a few minor elements have changed. Daniel does not believe that
the changes are significant enough to affect IPP activity. A few changes
have been made to the Digest authentication scheme. Daniel will examine
this further to see what changes to an implementation are necessary.
TLS -
draft-ietf-tls-https-01.txt: This is the TLS profile for HTTP 1.1. Can
we apply this for IPP as is? It is much more detailed than the two-page
reference to TLS currently in the IPP documents. Daniel described the
method proposed for upgrading from an "insecure" to a secure HTTP
connection. He says there are still doubts about the degree of security
it really offers-especially with regard to "man in the middle" attacks.
According to Daniel, the document is only 70% complete, and further
testing is still required. The group will need to watch this document as
it progresses, and evaluate its (potential) impact on IPP.
Daniel also called attention to a document named "Upgrading to TLS within
HTTP", which is not yet out as an I-D, suggests a solution how TLS can be
combined with applications, such as HTTP, to share the same port number.
This is in response to requirements from Keith Moore in the previous
IETF meeting. It is complementary to the HTTP over TLS document.
CONNEG -
draft-ietf-conneg-media-features-00.txt: This document is from the
newly formed CONNEG (Content Negotiation) Working Group and partly
overlaps with IPP. Carl-Uno wants to make sure that this document does not
conflict with the IPP printing model and features. According to
Carl-Uno, it is more aligned with the Printer MIB than with IPP. Larry
Masinter says that this is more due to historical reasons rather than
anything else. Larry suggests that the IPP group review the document and
submit any proposed changes-especially for the printer section.
Why is there only a single token for media type? Is this sufficient?
This issue will be raised at the next IPP meeting.
draft-ietf-conneg-feature-reg-00.txt: Carl-Uno wants the group to
consider if we should adopt the registration methods proposed in this
document. Are they appropriate for IPP?
Larry Masinter mentioned that there is a CONNEG document describing an
algebra for specifying combinations of features. This algebra might be
useful for consideration in a future version of IPP. The algerbra seems
to allow for combinations, which makes the question about single token
for media type redundant.
MIB -
A couple of new MIB drafts for Events and Applications were mentioned.
It was suggested to look further at those drafts in the work on IPP
Notifications.
HTTP Envy -
One Internet-Draft titled "HTTP Envy" has been submitted that suggests
that people should not be using HTTP for protocols. However, there are
no alternatives suggested in the document. Carl-Uno says that the
document might be an interesting read, but he does not think it contains
anything new that should cause us to change our decision to use HTTP for
IPP.
Server Location -
draft-ietf-svrloc-printer-scheme-02.txt: SLP is being promoted by the
IESG as the "correct" method for locating services. According to Ira,
they feel that LDAP is too heavyweight. Scott Isaacson, Randy Turner and
Ira McDonald reviewed the SLP draft with the editor (P. St. Pierre), and
the document has been updated to incorporate many of the comments that
are relevant to the IPP Working Group requirements.
Meeting adjourned at 12:00 noon.
The next teleconference will be held on March 25 at 10:00am PST.
Carl-Uno Manros
Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
Email: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com