All we are doing is making IETF more politically correct, and thus making
politics slow down the technical process... Are we going to go through
several version of the draft arguing over this???
Let's just choose one and move on... It will not impact the sales of any
products nor the operation of any protocol...
From: Manros, Carl-Uno B [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 11:33 AM
To: Bruce Greenblatt; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org;
Subject: RE: IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Schema
It is politically incorrect. We had objections raised in IET47 on this.
IETF IPP Chair
From: Bruce Greenblatt [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 11:26 AM
To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Schema
What's wrong with continuing to use the one from Sun? As long as it is
unambiguous, who cares?
At 11:59 AM 4/21/2000 -0600, email@example.com wrote:
>The Internet Printing Protocol Working Group is developing an Internet
>Draft describing an LDAP Schema for Printer Services.
>For expediency, the initial draft specifies OIDs from a Sun Microsystems
>private enterprise subtree. In preparation for a standards track document
>we would like these OIDs to be routed in a standards subtree. We want to
>harmonize with any convention that may exist within the LDAP community for
>registering this subtree. Will the LDAP group make the request for an
>assigned OID subtree or would you prefer for the IPP group to make the
Bruce Greenblatt, Ph. D.
Directory Tools and Application Services, Inc.
Sign up for our LDAP Technical Overview Seminar at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 15:08:07 EDT