IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Sche

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Sche

RE: IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Schema

From: harryl@us.ibm.com
Date: Fri Apr 21 2000 - 15:42:19 EDT

  • Next message: James Kempf: "IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Schema"

    Personally, I don't care about "politically" correct, I'm simply trying to
    be correct.

    I think a standards track RFC will carry the IETF copyright meaning the
    IETF is ultimately responsible for "change control" and would (presumably)
    desire not to have OIDs managed and maintained by a private enterprise.

    Granted, there's not a lot of dynamics available that could inadvertently
    "hose" an assigned OID subtree... no matter where it lies.

    Harry Lewis
    IBM Printing Systems

    "Alexis Bor" <alexis.bor@directoryworks.com>
    Sent by: owner-ipp@pwg.org
    04/21/00 01:02 PM

            To: "Manros, Carl-Uno B" <cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com>, "Bruce
    Greenblatt"
    <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>, Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS,
    <mark.wahl@innosoft.com>, <ietf-ldapext@netscape.com>
            cc: <ipp@pwg.org>
            Subject: RE: IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Schema

    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...

    -- Alexis

    Alexis Bor
    Directory Works, Inc.
    alexis.bor@directoryworks.com
    http://www.directoryworks.com

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Manros, Carl-Uno B [mailto:cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com]
    Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 11:33 AM
    To: Bruce Greenblatt; harryl@us.ibm.com; mark.wahl@innosoft.com;
    ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
    Cc: ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: IPP> Re: Root OID for IPP Printer Schema

    Bruce,

    It is politically incorrect. We had objections raised in IET47 on this.

    Carl-Uno Manros
    IETF IPP Chair

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Bruce Greenblatt [mailto:bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com]
    Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 11:26 AM
    To: harryl@us.ibm.com; mark.wahl@innosoft.com; ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
    Cc: ipp@pwg.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?

    Bruce

    At 11:59 AM 4/21/2000 -0600, harryl@us.ibm.com wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >The Internet Printing Protocol Working Group is developing an Internet
    >Draft describing an LDAP Schema for Printer Services.
    >
    >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipp-ldap-printer-schema-00.t

    xt
    >
    >
    >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
    >request?
    >
    >Harry Lewis
    >
    >
    >
    ==============================================
    Bruce Greenblatt, Ph. D.
    Directory Tools and Application Services, Inc.
    http://www.directory-applications.com
    Sign up for our LDAP Technical Overview Seminar at:
    http://www.acteva.com/go/dtasi



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 15:49:21 EDT