I originally declared that removing the redirect feature would be fine
for our IPP implementation as we are not currently doing notification
with our iPrint implementation.
From my point of view the only time that the redirect would be useful
is when the notification service is not running on the same box as the
print service. Down the road if say the PSI group wanted to implement
some form of notification service it could be useful to just register
with one service that is remote from the target device or intermediary
device. But, I'm With Ira on this. I don't want to add any new
notification items to my client as we have shipped numerous Windows
clients at this point. And, I don't have any users complaining that
they want to have notifications to annoy them.
Sr. Software Engineer
Novell, Inc., the leading provider of Net services software
>>> "Robert Herriot" <email@example.com> 07/31/02 03:05AM >>>
Harry says that redirect is simple to implement. I agree, but
is only part of the issue.
Each feature requires documentation, testing and support. There is no
thing as a free feature.
Very few people have responded to this issue and no one has said that
a necessary feature.
So, it would seem hard to justify keeping a feature that.seems to have
value to anyone, but does have a cost to every vendor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "McDonald, Ira" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "'Mike Sweet'" <email@example.com>; "Hastings, Tom N"
Cc: "Harry Lewis" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <Ron.Bergman@Hitachi-hkis.com>;
Tronson" <TTRONSON@novell.com>; "McDonald, Ira"
"Robert Herriot" <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 8:46 PM
Subject: RE: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status code
> If we keep it, remember it can be OPTIONAL to use but MUST be
> to support (for the Client - that is, IPP Clients MUST honor and use
> the redirect).
> Does everyone want a new REQUIRED to implement application redirect
> feature (for IPP Clients)?
> I doubt it very much. And that's the test that the IESG will apply,
> for interoperability.
> - Ira McDonald
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Sweet [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:09 PM
> To: Hastings, Tom N
> Cc: Harry Lewis; Ron.Bergman@Hitachi-hkis.com; Ted Tronson;
> Ira; Robert Herriot; firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Last Call comment to remove redirect URL and status
> from IPPGET
> Hastings, Tom N wrote:
> > ...
> > Could the six commenters (see the To: line) who agreed to remove
> > redirection, please respond as to whether they are still in favor
> > deleting the Get-Notifications redirection or that they are now
> > willing to keep Get-Notifications redirection in the IPPGET spec
> > case someone wants to implement IPPGET with a Notification
> If we keep it, we probably do need a redirect timeout parameter, or
> to define what should happen if the redirect server doesn't handle
> > As Bob asks, is anyone planning to use a Notification Server or
> > that they might want to?
> We're not planning to.
> Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products
> Printing Software for UNIX
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 31 2002 - 12:46:31 EDT