IPP Mail Archive: IPP> RE: Help - Naming problems in SLP 'se

IPP Mail Archive: IPP> RE: Help - Naming problems in SLP 'se

IPP> RE: Help - Naming problems in SLP 'service:printer'

From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Tue Feb 29 2000 - 16:38:36 EST

  • Next message: Manros, Carl-Uno B: "IPP> ADM - New Issue of ACM Standard View dedicated to IPP"

    Hi Erik,

    Thanks very much for clear direction. I'll make a serious effort
    to get the revised SLP 'service:printer' schema out before the
    I-D cutoff on 10 March (for the Adelaide IETF plenary).

    I labelled the last one 'v1.0' in the template source. Should
    I label the revision 'v1.1' in the template source? Or should we
    try to just publish the fixup as 'v1.0'?

    Best Regards,
    - Ira McDonald (consulting architect at Sharp Labs America)
      (co-editor of SLP 'service:printer' template)
      High North Inc

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Erik Guttman [mailto:Erik.Guttman@germany.sun.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 2:26 AM
    To: McDonald, Ira
    Cc: 'Erik.Guttman@germany.sun.com'; 'srvloc@srvloc.org'; 'ipp@pwg.org'
    Subject: Re: Help - Naming problems in SLP 'service:printer'

    > Many of the SLP 'service:printer' attributes (largely taken from the
    > IPP Model) lack a proper scope prefix 'printer-'. This forces us to add
    > those prefixes when translating to an LDAP schema.
    > Tom Hastings (editor of IPP Model) just asked me to write to you and ask
    > if we can (once more) update the SLP 'service:printer' template and add
    > the proper 'printer-' prefixes, to make the translation cleaner and any
    > blind mapping (by an SLP-DA to an LDAP directory server) safe. Some of
    > the numerous currently 'unsafe' attribute names include:
    > uri-authentication-supported
    > uri-security-supported
    > media-supported
    > color-supported
    > sides-supported
    > Has IANA already registered <draft-ietf-svrloc-printer-scheme-05.txt>?

    still lacks the registrations. I sent them to IANA in December!
    > If I turn out a revised I-D within the next 10 days, can we send that to
    > IANA instead?

    Go ahead.

    Even if the template version 1.0 goes into the repository, we can submit
    the new draft as template version 1.1. No problem.

    I intend to talk to some members of the IESG soon about how to escalate
    interaction with IANA so the template registry will get started.
    > Tom Hastings and I are very concerned about polluting the LDAP flat
    > attribute namespace with names like 'uri-security-supported' and
    > 'media-supported' without proper 'printer-' prefixes.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 29 2000 - 16:57:39 EST