Subject: IPP> Re: Does the world need a robust host-to-device network prin

From: Harry Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 19:04:46 -0500

If we were to address a new, standard, host-to-device printing protocol

> Now if somebody wants to have a separate debate about writing a really
> robust protocol for interfacing to printers (and I mean the real hardware
> not some logical abstraction) then that will suit me fine. Lets start a new
> track and call it, say, NLS (Not LPD and SNMP). This is what I initially
> wanted to do but could not persuade enough people.

in my opinion, it should be based on the set of attributes defined for IPP
and the resulting device protocol should be as closely correlated with IPP
as possible such that the mapping is very straight forward and simple.

Harry Lewis

---

From: Tom Hastings <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 17:22:59 PST

I agree completely with Harry here.  We need to build on IPP, not start
anew.

In fact to further the discussion on defining such a "robust host-to-device" 
network printing protocol (probably NOT across firewalls) and to test
whether we can really build on IPP (as Harry and I advocate):

  People that are raising issues with IPP as the "robust host-to-device
  network printing protocol when not going across firewalls",
  please indicate whether the problem is with the current IPP Model document 
  or the current IPP protocol document.

For the problems with the Model document, they may be resolvable by 
extending the Model, by, say, adding more Printer attributes and maybe
a Set-Printer-Attributes operation?  And, of course, notification.

For problems that were with the protocol (mapping) document, the PWG might 
develop a second IPP protocol document for use in the host to printer 
connection whose semantics would be the same (extended) IPP Model document.  
This second IPP protocol mapping document would be a PWG standard, not an 
IETF standard, since the document deals with the host to printer connection 
only (and not the Internet).  

NOTE that some printers would implement both IPP protocol mappings, if they 
wanted to be used across the Internet and in the host to printer connection.
But with the same semantic model, such a dual implementation would not be
a big burden.

Tom

---

From: Philip Thambidurai <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 06:33:26 -0500

Yes, I think building on IPP should be considered and examined thoroughly before
other efforts are started.

Philip Thambidurai