IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> notification methods

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> notification methods

RE: IPP> notification methods

From: Zehler, Peter (Peter.Zehler@usa.xerox.com)
Date: Mon Aug 14 2000 - 07:42:23 EDT

  • Next message: Zehler, Peter: "IPP> TES - Bake-Off Phone conference"

    Carl,

    I do not claim that INDP will work with every network configuration. That
    is why I want to see a "registration" event sent as soon as an INDP
    registration is made. I do claim that a machine readable notification is
    useful, as is a human readable form. I claim that a "real time"
    notification mechanism is useful, as is a store-and-forward notification
    mechanism. I also claim there are network configurations in the home, on
    the road and in the office that allow INDP.

    There are configurations where mailto notification will not work. My mother
    can use IPP to print to my home printer. From her point of view she just
    presses the print button. She does not have an email account. For her,
    mailto would not be an option.

    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: kugler@us.ibm.com [mailto:kugler@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 12:57 PM
    To: Zehler, Peter
    Cc: jkm@underscore.com; ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: IPP> notification methods

    Peter-

    I once tried to run a server on an ATT Worldnet dial-up account. It just
    didn't work. Their T&Cs say
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
     Additional Rules of Member Conduct
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
        1. not use your AT&T WorldNet Service dial-up connection to host a
          dedicated Internet server site.
                                                                               
                                                                               

    It's easy enough for them to prevent you from running a server, simply by
    blocking incoming connections. Whether or not they were actually blocking
    me, or something else was wrong, I don't know. Anyway, there are likely to
    be other problems. For example, (from the DSL Reports knowledge base,
    http://www.dsl-reports.com/information/kb/):
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
     private ip
     Some DSL (or cable) networks may provide you a private IP address. The
     good news is that probably doesn't change, and is secure. The bad news is
     that it isn't a real IP so nobody on the internet can reach you, although
     you can reach everyone. This is essentially NAT implemented by the
     provider on a grand scale.
                                                                               
                                                                               

                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
     NAT
     NAT stands for Network Address Translation. NAT is a technique for
     translating one set of IP addresses, often private, to another set, often
     public. Compare NAT to socks -- NAT is often implemented on a router or
     specialized NAT box, although it is equally commonly implemented on a PC,
     running NAT software.
                                                                               
     NAT is a very flexible technique, but in the DSL world you will
     interested (or maybe using) just one implementation: NAT setup to allow a
     single public IP address to be simultaneously reused by multiple internal
     PCs with private IP addresses. To the outside world, you appear to have
     only a single IP, but you actually have many devices 'behind' this IP
     address.
                                                                               
     Note, you don't get something for nothing here! With NAT, as with socks,
     incoming connections can be problematic to setup, requiring configuration
     on your NAT capable router, or NAT software, to assign (map) external
     services (web, FTP and so on) through to specific internal machines. Many
     NAT capable devices or software are not sufficiently flexible to cope
     with all requirements and software you may have, and some 'NAT
     unfriendly' protocols break, even if NAT maps them correctly!
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               

    Certainly you can get multiple fixed IP addresses, etc., if you're willing
    to pay for it. The question is: is the marginal utility of INDP
    notifications sufficient to justify the cost of these services.

         -Carl

    "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler@usa.xerox.com> on 08/11/2000 10:01:30 AM

    To: Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, jkm@underscore.com
    cc: ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: IPP> notification methods

    Carl,

    I don't know who your ISP is but mine has no control over a server running
    on my host. They do control the length of my IP lease. In my case the
    lease lasts hours. Certainly enough time for a notification. (Not enough
    time to host a business...they charge for that.)

    I can have a fixed IP address and I can have multiple IP addresses if I so
    desire. The use of INDP assumes programmatic interactions in near real
    time. If I build an application that relies on this it may well impose
    requirements on system/network configurations as well as influence the
    components I buy.

    I see a real need for programmatic as well as end user notification. We
    should be specifying and building enabling technologies. Our role should
    be
    enable policy not to enforce it.

    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: kugler@us.ibm.com [mailto:kugler@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 5:25 PM
    To: jkm@underscore.com
    Cc: ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: Re: IPP> notification methods

    It's equally impractical in the road warrior scenario. Most ISPs won't let
    you run a server unless you pay them for the privilege.

    SOHO is another problem. Windows Connection Sharing and other network
    address translation schemes are often used so that multiple hosts on a LAN
    can all reach the Internet through a single IP address allocated by the
    ISP. Of course, ISPs will be happy to sell you more addresses, for a
    monthly fee...

    So, it's impractical for enterprise, SOHO, and dial-up. What does that
    leave? Possibly some university networks (and Lexmark ;-) ); I can't
    think of much else.

         -Carl

    Jay Martin <jkm@underscore.com> on 08/04/2000 02:53:08 PM

    Please respond to jkm@underscore.com

    To: Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS
    cc: ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: Re: IPP> notification methods

    Carl,

    Ah, now you've caught my attention... ;-)

    > Me and 99% of other end users in the real world. INDP over the Internet
    is
    > not impossible, just impractical.

    We must assume your term "end users in the real world" refers to
    enterprise environments, right?

    That is, if the "real world" implies a usage scenario describing a
    "Road Warrior sitting in her hotel room wanting to print a document
    at a local copy shop", then in your opinion can INDP satisfy those
    99% of "real world" users? Or is it equally impractical as in the
    enterprise environment?

         ...jay



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 14 2000 - 07:51:40 EDT