PWG Mail Archive: Re: PWG> Latest Status for IPP

Re: PWG> Latest Status for IPP

Robert Herriot (robert.herriot@Eng.Sun.COM)
Tue, 25 Aug 1998 15:31:49 -0700

Although I would prefer the IPP documents to be standards track document, I don't believe that we can wait any longer and should switch to informational. If we do so, I assume that can we avoid the addition of the ipp scheme and we go with the June 30 documents with a few typos fixed.

Bob Herriot

At 07:26 AM 8/22/98 , Manros, Carl-Uno B wrote:
>All,
>
>I am sending this message to the PWG members rather than to the IPP DL.
>Latest news from Keith Moore seems to indicate that he wants to enforce
>what was in his recent document:
>
> On the use of HTTP as a Substrate for Other Protocols
> <draft-iesg-using-http-00.txt>
>
>which would mean development of new not yet existing security features,
>which we all know can take a loooong time.
>
>He indicates that we can probably get the IPP RFCs out if we were
>prepared to drop the aim of getting them on the standards track.
>
>What is your reaction? How many of you would be willing to let the IPP
>documents be downgraded to "Informational" instead?
>
>If I can get a quick feedback from you on the PWG DL and there is
>sufficiently much support for that, I may be able to negotiate a deal
>with our Area Directors along those lines next week in Chicago.
>
>Carl-Uno
>
>
>Carl-Uno Manros
>Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
>701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
>Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
>Email: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com
>