IPP Mail Archive: Re: PWG-ANNOUNCE> FW: Diff files for IPP&

IPP Mail Archive: Re: PWG-ANNOUNCE> FW: Diff files for IPP&

Re: PWG-ANNOUNCE> FW: Diff files for IPP> Notification Documents

From: Robert Herriot (bob@herriot.com)
Date: Wed Jun 23 2004 - 04:26:32 EDT

  • Next message: Carl: "IPP> Re: Thank you!"

    I'm sorry that my reply is on pwg-announce. However, I need to respond to
    the Ira's email that he sent via pwg-announce.

    I hope that the PWG members are willing to accept the notification
    documents in their current form and will not request any changes or
    enhancements (small typos and errors excepted). In their current form,
    they are likely to be published as RFCs soon because IETF reviewers have
    made comments about the documents and I have made corrections that address
    IETF reviewers' suggestions. If I make changes beyond those requested by
    the IETF reviewers, there are two major problems.
    First, I don't have time to make major changes and no one else does
    either. I have offered to do only a small amount of pro-bono
    work. Second, the IETF review process would have to start all over again,
    and the reviewers have made it clear that they don't want to review the
    documents again. Unless these documents progress in essentially their
    current form, they run a very high risk of never being published by the
    IETF.

    I believe that it is best for the PWG to ensure that the IETF publish these
    3 documents, and that means that they must be published in their current
    form. If PWG wants to make extensions to these documents, such extensions
    should be published in new IEEE-ISTO documents via some new process that is
    a successor to the process that produced these documents.

    Bob Herriot

    At Tuesday 6/22/2004 07:18 PM, McDonald, Ira wrote:
    >Hi,
    >
    >Bob Herriot has just finished doing minimal required
    >changes to the three IPP Notification documents
    >(requirements, base, and IPPGET delivery method)
    >to respond to the pending IETF reviewer comments.
    >
    >If you don't like these semantics, this is your LAST
    >chance to change them for IPP, before they move onto
    >the IETF 'standards track'. Note that WIMS currently
    >supports leases (for example) via different attributes.
    >
    >Cheers,
    >- Ira
    >
    >Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
    >Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
    >PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
    >phone: +1-906-494-2434
    >email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
    >
    >
    >-----Original Message-----
    >From: owner-ipp@pwg.org [mailto:owner-ipp@pwg.org]On Behalf Of Robert
    >Herriot
    >Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 6:22 PM
    >To: ipp@pwg.org
    >Subject: Diff files for IPP> Documents
    >
    >
    >I have uploaded .doc and .pdf files.
    >
    >Each file is the diff of the current Word file that is the source for the
    >latest IETF draft against the Word file that was the source of the preceding
    >IETF draft.
    >
    >ipp-notification-requirements-040621-rev.pdf
    >ipp-notify-get-040621-rev.pdf
    >ipp-not-spec-040621-rev.pdf
    >
    >and similar for .doc files.
    >
    >They are in the usual pwg/ipp/new_NOT directory.
    >..
    >
    >Bob Herriot



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 23 2004 - 04:25:54 EDT