IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeti

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeti

RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM - The IPP Notification I-Ds will now go the IESG)

From: Wagner,William (bwagner@digprod.com)
Date: Mon Aug 14 2000 - 18:24:35 EDT

  • Next message: Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM: "RE: IPP> notification methods"

    I interpreted Bob's use of the word browser to refer to a EMAIL program,
    rather than an HTTP browser.

    As for scenario, I always keep Outlook running when I am in the office, and
    it can signal me whenever a new message comes in. Indeed, with AutoPreview,
    I get enough of the message so that I would seen the notification text
    without even pulling up the message. I realize this has become a religious
    issue, but I think mail-to would work just great to let a large proportion
    of users know what is happening with print jobs and machines without any new
    plug-in or new application. Although a plug-in could add some information
    for the user and perhaps do a popup, it hardly seems necessary

    I am less clear on what the Machine Readable approach (INDP or MAIL-TO)
    would be used for. If it is for stand-alone spoolers, I agree that MAIL-TO
    is not suitable. If a printer company wants to provide some spiffy new
    application, I agree that a fully stand along program that does not use the
    existing email system would probably be better.

    So, I think that Bob's approach is clean and reasonable, but I do not see
    the advantage of adding "Machine-readable information" unless this approach
    is going to be used more widely for asynchronous message delivery.

    And I have to say, I know of no human who can read what is transferred on an
    Ethernet line without a machine, so I think the machine readable versus
    human readable distinction is misleading. The distinction seems to be "uses
    prevalent existing applications" versus "needs special applications". Or
    uses a store and forward mechanism that is polled by the recipient versus
    using a continuing listening application in the recipient's machine (dare I
    say a server?).

    William A. Wagner (Bill Wagner)
    Director of Technology
    Imaging Division
    NETsilicon, Inc.
    781-398-4588

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Jay Martin [mailto:jkm@underscore.com]
    Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 5:46 PM
    To: Herriot, Robert
    Cc: IETF-IPP
    Subject: Re: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM -
    The IPP Notification I-Ds will now go the IESG)

    Bob,

    I'm confused about this paragraph:

    > A use scanario is a browser with a plug-in which uses IMAP or POP3 to get
    > and display email that represents Printer Event Notifications (the plug-in
    > uses the Content-Type to separate the email).

    What is the plug-in supposed to do? Be configured (by the poor user) to go
    out to some IMAP/POP server and fetch mail sent to that server by an IPP
    printer?

    Why a browser plug-in? Can you be more specific with this use case?

            ...jay



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 14 2000 - 18:33:11 EDT