Subject: IPP> ADM - IPP Charter and Slot in Memphis

From: Carl-Uno Manros <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 10:34:44 PST

Harald and Keith,

the IPP group is still eagerly waiting your feedback on the Charter
business as well as confirmation on our slot in Memphis. People are trying
to make their reservations for Memphis and need to know at least which
week-day that we can expect the IPP slot to be, as several experts will
only come in for the IPP meeting rather than the full week. Remember that I
asked you several weeks ago to get a slot early in the week, as we will
hold an IPP meeting at the end of the week before the IETF in Memphis, and
some people want to combine the two trips.

The tentative Agenda for the IPP WG is:

- Report on general progress and status of the project

- Review and comments on the IPP Requirements document (I-D expected in
time for the meeting)

- Review and comments on the IPP Model & Semantics document (I-D expected
in time for the meeting)

- Discuss outline for the Protocol document

- Discuss outline for the Directory Support document

- Any other business

--

Regards,

Carl-Uno on behalf of the IPP group

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: [email-masked]

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 17:14:03 -0500

> The IPP group is still eagerly waiting your feedback on the Charter
> business as well as confirmation on our slot in Memphis. 

The IESG met earlier today and discussed the IPP charter. It decided
to approve the working group once the following changes are made to
the charter:

+ The WG has to make recommendations as to how to acheive reasonable
  compatibility between ipp and lpr.  IESG understands that lpr is 
  insufficient in its current form and basically non-extensible, that 
  its behavior varies widely between implementations and so does not
  produce repeatable results, and that it lacks the security needed 
  for printing in a global Internet.  However, IESG also recognizes 
  that lpr is widely deployed, and that a new protocol -- even a much
  better one -- could be disruptive to the installed base. 

+ There is a new requirement that all working group charters
  explicitly address security, so we need to add this. 

Just to be clear: the working group has been approved, but I have to
show that these things have been incorporated to the charter before
the group is formally created.  So I'll add a paragraph or two to the
charter that reflects what IESG agreed to, and run it by the IPP
chairs before giving it to the IESG Executive Director.

> People are trying to make their reservations for Memphis and need to
> know at least which week-day that we can expect the IPP slot to be,
> as several experts will only come in for the IPP meeting rather than
> the full week. Remember that I asked you several weeks ago to get a
> slot early in the week, as we will hold an IPP meeting at the end of
> the week before the IETF in Memphis, and some people want to combine
> the two trips.

IPP is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday at 9:00 am.

Keith

---

From: Carl-Uno Manros <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 14:55:33 PST

>chairs before giving it to the IESG Executive Director.

Keith,

thanks for the good news.  We are already working on security, so that
should not cause any problem as far I can see.

I am not yet quite clear on what the requirement to have "reasonable
compatibility to LPR" will mean in practise. I believe that we already have
all the comparable functionality in our new solution, and that building
gateways between IPP and LPR should not be too difficult. Is the IESG
looking for more than that?  When you talk about LPR compatibility I assume
that it is limited to the rather rather small subset in RFC 1179, rather
then the actual "LPR inspired" products, with considerably more
functionality, that people actually use...   Let us see what your proposed
text looks like.

Carl-Uno

Carl-Uno Manros

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 18:42:10 -0500

> gateways between IPP and LPR should not be too difficult. 

Yes, I think that's true.

> Is the IESG looking for more than that? 

Perhaps only that the group explicitly specify (probably in a separate
document) how to map LPR onto IPP.

> When you talk about LPR compatibility I assume that it is limited to
> the rather rather small subset in RFC 1179, rather then the actual
> "LPR inspired" products, with considerably more functionality, that
> people actually use...

Something like that.  1179 is incorrect in so many places that I
wouldn't want to make it definitive.  The idea is not to add new
features to LPR, but to document how to implement 4.2BSD LPR
functionality in terms of IPP.

> Let us see what your proposed text looks like.

It may be early next week.  I'm out-of-town from Friday-Sunday,
attending a design team meeting for the DRUMS working group.

Keith