Subject: IPP> MOD - Concerns about "fan-in" -Reply

From: Scott Isaacson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 10:36:25 -0700

Jay wrote:

>>> JK Martin <[email-masked]> 03/20/97 03:08am >>>
> However, if the model then implies that "Printer" is not really a
> one-to-one association with a physical printer, we are going to run
> into some complexities when we (eventually) try to design
>  management capabilities.
> 
> That is, if a management-oriented app wants to use IPP as a way to
> determine the set of printers that may be managed, how does the app
> discover the actual physical printers associated with a Printer?

There are new attributes that could be added the the model (added
to a printer object) in order to show this relationship.  We do have
the notion of an "output-device-assigned" Printer attribute
now (which I don't think that we should have by the way), but we
don't have "associated-output-devices".  We could 
fairly easily add it, but I don't want to confuse issues more than
they are right now.  We have some problems in the REQ to MOD to
PRO document path defining what is in scope and what is not
for v1.0, we don't need to make it worse.  HOWEVER, we have done
enough talking about it that I personally feel that we have some
ideas on how to extend these objects so that we can do more later.

The model could be expanded right now in order to include this information and these
relationships, however it is not needed right now.
We have enough complexities as it its.

Scott

---

From: Tom Hastings <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 15:46:52 PST

I agree with Scott, that we don't need to add any attributes
to IPP V1.0 to allow an implementation to support fan-in.
The user doesn't need to be aware that fan-in is actually happening.

We can add whatever is needed to IPP V2.0 for management to setup and
support fan-in.

Tom

P.S. see discussion about output-device-assigned below.

>now (which I don't think that we should have by the way), but we

I think that output-device-assigned is useful for the fan-out case
(which we already have in IPP V1.0),
so that a user can find out to which output device to go get his/her
output.  We have a similar attribute in the Job Monitoring MIB.
The output-device-assigned attribute may be a good candidate for
conditionally mandatory for fan-out configurations, i.e., a single
Printer that doesn't have fan-out would NOT implement the 
output-device-assigned attribute.