IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for

RE: IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for Notifications - Commen ts by April 15

From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Sun Mar 31 2002 - 17:17:20 EST

  • Next message: Michael Sweet: "Re: IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for Notifications - Commen ts by April 15"

    Hi Carl-Uno,

    I support your proposal to make 'ippget' the mandatory IPP notifications
    delivery method.

    Note that the IPPFAX choice of 'ippget' was driven by the model of
    emulation of "real" fax machines, which argued for in-band notification
    via 'ippget'. That argument may not be as strong for IPP the general
    print protocol (where out-of-band notifications have been traditional).

    Security should be improved in both of the other optional IPP notification
    delivery methods:

    1) For SMTP notification, the use of S/MIME should be required
        (S/MIME is only a MAY in the current draft).
    2) For INDP notification, the use of TLS should be required
        (TLS is only a MAY in the current draft).

    Neither of the optional methods is likely to pass IETF scrutiny with their
    present security requirements and 'Security Considerations' sections.
    Certainly not if chosen as the required IPP notification delivery method.

    Cheers,
    - Ira McDonald
      High North Inc

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Carl [mailto:carl@manros.com]
    Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 3:30 PM
    To: Carl; ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: IPP> RE: Mandatory Delivery Method for Notifications - Comments
    by April 15

    Resend, with spelling corrected etc. The earlier message slipped away before
    I had finished it.

    All,

    Ned Freed communicated in an earlier message to the IPP WG, that the IESG
    found it unacceptable that we had not choosen ONE mandatory delivery method
    for notifications. They would also like to see that delivery method mandate
    the use of security.

    As those of you who were around about two years ago remember, we could not
    reach agreement about mandating any of the delivery methods.

    However, in the meantime the members of the IPPFAX project in the Printer
    Working Group has reached an agreement that they will require all IPPFAX
    implementions to implement the 'ippget' delivery method, and it also
    requires support for TLS security.

    Hence, I would like to put up the following strawman proposal to the IPP WG
    members to satisfy the IESG comments:

    1) Change the main Notifiction document to require that 'ippget' delivery
    MUST be included for all notification implementations, but any of the other
    two methods can also be implemented as an option.
    <draft-ietf-ipp-not-spec-08.txt>

    2) Put that rule also into the three delivery method documents, so it is
    crystal clear what the rule is.
    <draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-06.txt>
    <draft-ietf-ipp-notify-mailto-04.txt>
    <draft-ietf-ipp-indp-method-06.txt>

    3) Further, in the 'ippget' delivery document, we specify that TLS security
    MUST be supported.
    <draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-06.txt>

    If we can reach agreement on this, I will instruct the IPP editor to
    implement these changes.

    I would like to get your reactions back on this proposal no later than April
    15, 2002.

    Carl-Uno Manros
    Chair of IETF IPP WG

    10701 S Eastern Ave #1117
    Henderson, NV 89052, USA
    Tel +1-702-617-9414
    Fax +1-702-617-9417
    Mob +1-310-251-7103
    Email carl@manros.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 31 2002 - 17:17:58 EST