IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> NOT> "notify-status-code&

RE: IPP> NOT> "notify-status-code" is undefined

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Fri Oct 20 2000 - 07:21:22 EDT

  • Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "RE: IPP> paper sources"

    True that enums are SIGNED-INTEGER 4 bytes, but so are the enums that we
    assign for "operations-supported" whose values have to fit into two bytes in
    the request headers, just like status codes have to fit into bytes the
    response. We just require that the two high order bytes always be zero when
    we assign the values.


    -----Original Message-----
    From: Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM [mailto:kugler@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 17:28
    To: Hugo Parra; ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: Re: IPP> NOT> "notify-status-code" is undefined

    I'm all for enums, however, enum attributes are still SIGNED-INTEGER, 4


    "Hugo Parra" <HPARRA@novell.com> on 10/16/2000 09:08:19 PM

    To: Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS
    Subject: Re: IPP> NOT> "notify-status-code" is undefined

    Their value range would suggest that "notify-status-code"s are in the same
    space as the other regular IPP "status-codes". For that reason I'd suggest
    that they be encoded the same way as "status-codes" i.e., with two bytes.
    I'm currently using ENUM to encode them. What do others think?


    >>> "Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM" <kugler@us.ibm.com> 10/10/00 03:56PM >>>
    ipp-not-spec-000830 fails to specify the attribute syntax for
    "notify-status-code" (returned in the Subscription Attributes Groups of

    It's not really obvious how to encode it, either. The operation attribute
    group's "status-code" is a SIGNED-SHORT in a special location. There is no
    attribute tag for a SIGNED-SHORT. "Integer" and "enum" are SIGNED-INTEGER.

    I'm guessing it should be (integer(0x00000001:0x00000415))?


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 20 2000 - 07:31:27 EDT