IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> V1.1 Last Call

IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> V1.1 Last Call

Re: IPP> V1.1 Last Call

Richard Shockey (rshockey@ix.netcom.com)
Thu, 11 Mar 1999 13:25:44 -0600

>If I remember correctly, at the Maui meeting we agreed that we wanted to
>make changes in IPP v1.1 to support IPP2IFAX or HI-FI DOCS or whatever it's
>called now. I'm in favor of moving along as soon as possible on IPP v1.1,
>but it does seem premature since we haven't really decided what the HI-FI
>DOCS work entails, or what it will require from IPP.

The HI-FI DOCS proposed charter specifically excludes rewriting either IPP
1.1 or the IFAX standard RFC2305. IMHO HI-FI DOCS is a super set of IPP
1.1 that will add attributes and functionality that create reliable
document transmission and reception.. a.k.a the F** word.

IPP 1.1 is therefore the baseline for HI-FI DOCS work. We must have the IPP
scheme and TLS incorporated which I believe is the principal work involved
in IPP 1.1 along with normal protocol enhancements and clean up discovered
during the Bake-Offs. I think its been made abundantly clear that those are
the minimum requirements for IPP 1.1 to go to Draft Standard.

>So what's the best phasing of this work, Richard? We will need IPP as a
>draft standard before the ITU gets involved,

Yes..sort of .. see below.

> but at what point in the HI-FI
>DOCS work would we want to get the ITU involved?
>Nick Webb

The ITU SG8 has its own ways of doing things and its own time tables for
getting involved. They will take no action before a formal IETF WG is
formed or HI-FI DOCS is returned to the IPP WG for action and IPP re
chartered in the event the IESG does not permit HI-FI DOCS to be formed.
This is a alternate scenario...based on the discussions in Minneapolis and
review of the work on the list the IESG may feel a separate WG is not
specifically warranted. This is a perfectly logical position since the APP
area is in major overload at this point and I have a deep sympathy for the
tasks the AD's are trying to manage here.

Three things have to happen for ITU SG8 involvement, should they _choose_
to be involved.

1. The work has to be chartered .. either by a HI-FI DOCS WG or by the IPP
WG itself.

2. IPP 1.1 must be proceeding to Draft Standard status since it is the

3. The associated HI-FI DOCS work must be sufficiently mature and IPP 1.1
seen as stable enough to be ready for quick IESG approvals.

At that point the ITUSG8 MAY initiate formal communications and start to
make comments and recommendations based on its own perceptions and
requirements. The IETF FAX WG did a marvelous job of paving the way for
cooperation at this level. Jim Rafferty and Dave Crocker formally went to
SG8 to present the IETF FAX work and numerous suggestions were made at that
stage to the ID's. Comments would probably about the HI-FI work and not
about IPP.

After that, should the ITU SG8 wish to reference the work, IPP 1.1 and all
of the HI-FI DOCS work must be Draft Standards... so there is time here.

BTW they do read IETF lists and what we are proposing is known to SG8.
They are meeting in late March where this topic may come up.

Richard Shockey
Shockey Consulting LLC
8045 Big Bend Blvd. Suite 110
St. Louis, MO 63119
Voice 314.918.9020
Fax 314.918.9015
INTERNET Mail & IFAX : rshockey@ix.netcom.com
eFAX 815.333.1237