IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> TES: Mandatory IPP notification a

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> TES: Mandatory IPP notification a

RE: IPP> TES: Mandatory IPP notification agreement

From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Wed Jun 21 2000 - 11:43:21 EDT

  • Next message: pmoore@peerless.com: "RE: IPP> TES: Mandatory IPP notification agreement"

    Hi Peter and Henrik,

    As a reminder to all - this is an IETF chartered working
    group - such working groups do NOT make decisions in
    face-to-face meetings (even at IETF Plenary sessions).
    Decisions are made (and ratified) ONLY on the public
    email discussion list.

    The IPP mandatory notification method MUST be able to
    politically survive the IESG review process.

    While I think the INDP is a good effort technically, I
    strongly doubt that the IESG will like it as the mandatory
    IPP notification method. Unlike Email (SMTP) or MIBs (SNMP)
    it interworks with no existing infrastructure, which is bad.

    This mandatory notification method issue has also been
    discussed at some IPP WG weekly telecons (some I've attended).
    But this is also NOT the forum for final decisions.

    Lastly, Peter you jumped from port filtering by firewalls
    to MIME type filtering - but the latter requires that the
    firewall have an Application Layer Gateway (ALG) to figure
    out the protocol and THEN to find the MIME type inside the
    protocol envelope.

    Personally, I agree with Henrik about selecting email as
    the IPP mandatory notification method.

    Cheers,
    - Ira McDonald, consulting architect at Xerox and Sharp
      High North Inc

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Zehler, Peter [mailto:Peter.Zehler@usa.xerox.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 5:25 AM
    To: henrik.holst@i-data.com; ipp@pwg.org; peter.ultved@i-data.com
    Subject: RE: IPP> TES: Mandatory IPP notification agreement

    Henrik,

    From the May PWG/IPP meeting minutes:
    "4.6 Mandatory Notification Method?

    After further discussion about a possible mandatory notification

    method, the group agreed that the INDP Notification method should

    become mandatory."

    As for going through firewalls, the Bake-Off (hopefully) will test that
    specifically. Firewalls can be configured to allow specific traffic to
    pass. Some filter only on a port number and others examine content. I
    intend to have two firewall vendors at the Bake-Off with products that are
    able to filter at least on the port number. I hope at least one will also
    be able to examine the MIME type.

    Pete
                                    Peter Zehler
                                    XEROX
                                    Xerox Architecture Center
                                    Email: Peter.Zehler@usa.xerox.com
                                    Voice: (716) 265-8755
                                    FAX: (716) 265-8792
                                    US Mail: Peter Zehler
                                            Xerox Corp.
                                            800 Phillips Rd.
                                            M/S 139-05A
                                            Webster NY, 14580-9701

    -----Original Message-----
    From: henrik.holst@i-data.com [mailto:henrik.holst@i-data.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 3:53 AM
    To: ipp@pwg.org; peter.ultved@i-data.com
    Subject: Re: IPP> TES: Mandatory IPP notification agreement

    Well it was my understanding that we didn't agree on a mandatory method.
    And the INDP method
    won't go through a firewall, so if you are searching for a mandatory method
    I would say MAILTO.

    Henrik

    "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler@usa.xerox.com>@pwg.org on 20-06-2000 17:43:51

    Sent by: owner-ipp@pwg.org

    To: "IPP Discussion List (E-mail)" <IPP@pwg.org>
    cc:

    Subject: IPP> TES: Mandatory IPP notification agreement

    All,

    I am working the content planning for the IPP Bake-Off. I want to be sure
    that there is PWG wide agreement on the notification issue.

    It is my understanding that INDP is the mandated IPP notification method.
    There were some minor updates that have been agreed to and we are awaiting
    the final version of the document for PWG last call. The minor changes are
    documented in the meeting minutes from May meeting of the PWG. This
    upcoming INDP document will be the document that the notification section
    of
    the Bake-Off will use as a base.

    Is this correct or did I misunderstand?

    Pete

                        Peter Zehler
                        XEROX
                        Xerox Architecture Center
                        Email: Peter.Zehler@usa.xerox.com
                        Voice: (716) 265-8755
                        FAX: (716) 265-8792
                        US Mail: Peter Zehler
                                Xerox Corp.
                                800 Phillips Rd.
                                M/S 139-05A
                                Webster NY, 14580-9701



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 21 2000 - 11:51:19 EDT