Subject: IPP> Notifications

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 22:13:33 -0400

This is remarkedly similar to my description of what I wanted that I kept
trying to get across in the meeting today.

1) A simple, limited flexibility, basically "hard-coded" set of information
(Job Complete, Job Cancelled, Job aborted, etc.) that is provided largely
tuned for human consumption that is requested in the IPP job submission
command.

2) A more complex, flexible solution for machine consumption that is
achieved through the addition of something like "Subscribe" and
"Unsubscribe" operations to IPP.  A richer, more robust set of events and
attributes (groups?, collections?, individual attributes?, etc.) can be
requested with the information send in several different ways (i.e TCP
port, SNMP trap, etc.)

Too bad you could be here to join in!!

**********************************************
* Don Wright                 [email-masked] *
* Product Manager, Strategic Alliances       *
* Lexmark International                      *
* 740 New Circle Rd                          *
* Lexington, Ky 40550                        *
* 606-232-4808 (phone) 606-232-6740 (fax)    *
**********************************************

To:   [email-masked]
cc:    (bcc: Don Wright)
bcc:  Don Wright
Subject:  IPP> Notifications

I still suggest that we are mixing two different things under the same
title.
Notifications: A user making known to the system their desire that a
message
be sent when some action occurs on their job (ie.e 'email me when this job
finishes')
Events: an IPP Client asking an IPP Printer to send it information
regarding
errors, jobs, .etc.
These may operate independantly, in tandem or in parallel.
I suggest that the behaviours need to be something like:
Notifications: Human readable, sent by a mechanism that is non-IPP (i.e
email, ftp,....). The content is user defined (or can be). The only protocl
addition we need is  that there needs to be job attributes thats convey the
users request. There may well be a standard set of mechanisms by which a
notification can be sent. They are bound to jobs.
Events: Machine readable. Carried in an IPP specified way using the same
basic protocol as the commands and jobs. The content is defined. A client
can request that they be generated for a specific job. In addition a client
can subscribe to events.
Usage scenario. A user asks for email when a job has finished printing. The
IPP request to the server has the attribute set saying 'notify when
printed'. The server queues the job up. When the job is sent to the printer
it sets the attribute saying 'send me an event when this job completes'.
(In
fact a server may well be subscribed full-time to job completion events).
When the server receives the event is goes into its job end process and
recalls that the user requested email - so it sends a message.

---

From: Paul Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:08:35 -0700

I would not necessarily agree about one being limited and the other being
flexible. They are just different in intent and behavior.

I would have been there If I could - I was there in spirit :-)

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	[email-masked] [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Wednesday, May 20, 1998 7:14 PM
> To:	Paul Moore
> Cc:	[email-masked]

---

From: Carl Kugler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:14:29 -0400

> basic protocol as the commands and jobs.

This implies something other than HTTP used as the basic protocol for commands
and jobs.

 -Carl

[email-masked] on 05/20/98 04:07:12 PM
Please respond to [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
cc:
Subject: IPP> Notifications

Notifications: A user making known to the system their desire that a message
be sent when some action occurs on their job (ie.e 'email me when this job
finishes')

Events: an IPP Client asking an IPP Printer to send it information regarding
errors, jobs, .etc.

it sets the attribute saying 'send me an event when this job completes'. (In

---

From: Paul Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 18:00:26 -0700

not necessarily

> From:	Carl Kugler [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Thursday, May 21, 1998 11:14 AM
> To:	[email-masked]
> Subject:	Re: IPP> Notifications
>

---

From: Carl Kugler <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:54:22 -0400

Care to elaborate?

I guess I should have been more specific and said "HTTP/1.1".

 -Carl

[email-masked] on 05/21/98 07:01:54 PM
Please respond to [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM@ibmus
cc:
Subject: RE: IPP> Notifications

not necessarily