IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> MS-new-operations.htm uploaded

IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> MS-new-operations.htm uploaded

Re: IPP> MS-new-operations.htm uploaded

Tom Hastings (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Tue, 7 Jul 1998 15:14:02 PDT

There seems to be a useful distinction between disabling an IPP Printer
object from accepting jobs for its device (or its devices when it controls
more than one device) - attached previously sent proposal for
Disable-Accepting-Jobs and Enable-Accepting-Jobs

and

disabling the IPP Printer from submitting jobs to the device (MS Pause-Job
semantics) while the IPP Printer continues to accept jobs for the device.

One way to get both would be to pattern the
Disable-Accepting-Jobs/Enable-Accepting-Jobs after the extension for
accessing MIBs, in which we
introduced the Device object. The device object is selectable in
Get-Printer-Attributes, if the client supplies the "which-device"
operation attribute. If the client doesn't supply the "which-device"
attribute, the client is talking about the IPP Printer object itself.

So we could have a Disable-Accepting-Jobs which
has an OPTIONAL "which-device" operation attribute. When supplied, the
"which-device" operation attribute prevents the IPP Printer object from
submitting additional jobs to the device, but the device keeps printing
the current job and any other jobs that it may have.

Comments?

Tom

At 10:39 07/07/98 PDT, Tom Hastings wrote:
>>At 10:49 6/29/98 PDT, Paul Moore wrote:
>>to ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_MOD/
>>Describes 7 new operations that MS may be using for IPP1.0
>>
>>We should discuss whther we want to make any of these standard extensions
>> snip...
>>
>>PausePrinter
>>
>>Requests that the printer stops scheduling new jobs. Any job that is
>currently >being printed is completed. The printer will still accept new
jobs.
>>
>>Current Code: 0X4001
>>
>>Access Rights: The requesting user must be an administrator of the printer
>>
>>
>>ResumePrinter
>>
>>Un-pauses a printer (see PausePrinter).
>>
>>Access Rights: The requesting user must be an administrator of the printer
>>
>
>Another pair of administrative operations that are strongly related to these
>and which would set the existing "printer-accepting-jobs" Printer Description
>attribute and relate to the proposed notification event (to be added to
>the Printer MIB): 'printer-is-accepting-jobs',
'printer-is-not-accepting-jobs'
>would be to add a pair of operations:
>
>
>Disable-Accepding-Jobs
>
>Causes the Printer object to no longer accept jobs, i.e., the Printer
>object MUST reject further Print-Job, Print-URI, Validate-Job, and
>Create-Job operations. If one of these operations is attempted to be
>submitted to the
>Printer object, the Printer object MUST reject the request and return
>the 'server-error-not-accepting-jobs' status code. The Printer object
>MUST continue to accept all other operations, including Add-Document and
>Send-Document operations, if supported, so that a partial job can be
>closed and printed. All currently submitted jobs continue to scheduled
>and printed.
>
>The Printer object sets its "printer-accepting-jobs" to 'false'.
>The Printer object MUST accept this operation no matter what state the
>Printer object is in, but MUST reject the operation if the value of the
>"printer-accepting-jobs" is already 'false'. This operation does not
>change the value of the Printer's "printer-state" attribute.
>
>Access Rights: The requesting user must be an administrator of the printer
>
>
>
>Enable-Accepting-Jobs
>
>Enables the Printer object to accept jobs. The Printer object sets its
>"printer-accepting-jobs" to 'true'. The Printer object MUST accept this
>operation no matter what state the Printer object is in, but MUST reject
>the operation if the value of its "printer-accepting-jobs" is already
>'true'. This operation does not change the value of the Printer's
>"printer-state" attribute.
>
>Access Rights: The requesting user must be an administrator of the printer
>
>
>ISSUE: What should the power up value of the Printer's
>"printer-is-accepting-jobs" attribute be: 'true', 'false', depends on
>site policy, depends
>on implementation?
>
>