attachment
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.hoenzb
{mso-style-name:hoenzb;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Ira,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I suggest that what is being identified is the physical device, and that the System Control Service is the proper recipient. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Bill Wagner<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> ipp-bounces@pwg.org [mailto:ipp-bounces@pwg.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ira McDonald<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, December 09, 2013 5:37 PM<br><b>To:</b> Kennedy, Smith (Wireless Architect)<br><b>Cc:</b> <ipp@pwg.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [IPP] RFC: Identify-Printer mini-extension<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Hi Smith,<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Tricky. The "identify action duration" would be a new attribute (which<br>would require a revision of JPS3 spec - yuck).<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>Mike's right that IPPSIX is the wrong place to do this - the conformance<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>shouldn't have anything to do with IPPSIX.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I also don't think that System Control Service should get into this business<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>- or maybe I'm crazy and that actually is the *right* place? Should SCS,<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>rather than an individual service, be the target of this device-level operation?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Someday, we need a lightweight IPP registration for whole new attributes<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>(in an existing attribute group), I suspect.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Cheers,<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>- Ira<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br clear=all><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)<br>Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG<br>Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG<br>Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group<br>Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG<br>IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB<br>Blue Roof Music / High North Inc<br><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic" target="_blank"><span style='color:#3333FF'>http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic</span></a><br><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc" target="_blank"><span style='color:#6600CC'>http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc</span></a><br>mailto: <a href="mailto:blueroofmusic@gmail.com" target="_blank">blueroofmusic@gmail.com</a><br>Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094<br>Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless Architect) <<a href="mailto:smith.kennedy@hp.com" target="_blank">smith.kennedy@hp.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>IMHO, these look fine. I wonder if the “identify action duration” needs to be covered by something? Does the System Control Service need to concern itself with this domain?<br><span style='color:#888888'><br><span class=hoenzb>Smith</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br><br><br>On 2013-12-09, at 12:53 PM, Michael Sweet <<a href="mailto:msweet@apple.com">msweet@apple.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>> All,<br>><br>> During our last Cloud Imaging Model WG meeting, we discussed having the ability to explicitly cancel a previous Identify-Printer operation. The consensus during that meeting was to add a new "identify-actions" keyword ('cancel') that would cancel any active identification mechanism.<br>><br>> In addition, a new "printer-state-reasons" keyword ('identifying-printer' was proposed, although given the existing 'identify-printer-requested' value I like adding 'identify-printer-active' instead) would be added to allow a Client to discover whether a printer is currently identifying itself using an action other than 'cancel', which by definition stops any active identification and removes the new keyword from the "printer-state-reasons" attribute...<br>><br>> The official registration would look like this:<br>><br>> Attributes (attribute syntax)<br>> Keyword Attribute Value Reference<br>> ----------------------- ---------<br>> identify-actions (1setOf type2 keyword) [PWG5100.13]<br>> cancel<br>><br>> printer-state-reasons (1setOf type2 keyword) [RFC2911]<br>> identify-printer-active<br>><br>> Thoughts?<br>><br>> (I considered adding this to IPPSIX, but since this has application outside of shared infrastructure/cloud deployments I think we should register it separately...)<br>><br>> _______________________________________________________________<br>> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair<br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> ipp mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:ipp@pwg.org">ipp@pwg.org</a><br>> <a href="https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp" target="_blank">https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>_______________________________________________<br>ipp mailing list<br><a href="mailto:ipp@pwg.org">ipp@pwg.org</a><br><a href="https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp" target="_blank">https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>