Hi Bill,
Yes, I think I volunteered to help in this area at an F2F meeting awhile back….AAA has a lot of tentacles throughout an implementation and architecture, so I think it would behoove us to consider this topic as soon as we can…things like capabilities are subject to authorization, but authorization is subject to authentication…yada yada yada. I do agree about the order of work, we should probably get the application basics down first.
Maybe we'll be ready to start discussing this in Redmond or Lexington, not sure what the current schedule is for the agreed upon work items…
R.
On Jun 25, 2012, at 2:40 PM, William A Wagner wrote:
> Hi Randy,
> Yes, this is the abstract model discussion. However, there were some who felt that even at this level, association/registration should be dealt with more thoroughly than merely stating that they must occur and must include the transfer of specific information. The interim conclusion was to proceed with the details of client job submission and print manager Job retrieval, which we think we have a good handle on, and get the model document going so that (particularly) the IPP group can proceed with binding specification (which must deal with the specifics of association/registration/authentication.) Regardless, I fully expect that association/registration/authentication will come up again in the model discussion. Please think about participating.
>> And I think the 10% value had to do with the effort of tailoring the communication of defined printing association/registration information to specific registration/login methods defined elsewhere
> Bill Wagner.
>> From: cloud-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of Randy Turner
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:58 PM
> To: cloud at pwg.org> Subject: Re: [Cloud] Minutes posted from today's concall
>>> Hi Guys,
>> Read the minutes of today's con call…sounds like things are moving along.
>> I wasn't sure regarding the status of association/registration/authentication (whatever you want to call it).
>> There was text in the minutes that the group was not going to tackle this -- is the idea not to tackle this at all? Or just that we're prioritizing our efforts and trying to complete the core model before tackling the other stuff ?
>> There was also a comment from the minutes that this would be a small amount of code (10%) -- I think this may be a conservative estimate. Anyway, we're talking about completing the core "abstract" model, correct? So we're really not talking about a concrete binding or implementation, so we're not talking about code here.
>> Also, reaching across the abstract-to-concrete boundary, the minutes mentioned something about XMPP -- I am working on implementations of cloud services and XMPP seems like a good fit, not only because it has a very robust publish/subscribe event model, but it can map into whatever AAA we decide to use (multiple mappings exist). There's a lot of really cool extensions currently being worked on within the XMPP community (both IETF and xmpp.org). Also, XMPP could be used for registration/presence as well. It's a nice communications substrate on which many apps could be mapped.
>> Thanks!
> Randy
>>> On Jun 25, 2012, at 1:40 PM, Michael Sweet wrote:
>>> All,
>> I have posted the minutes from today's Cloud Imaging WG conference call to:
>>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/minutes/cloud-concall-minutes-20120625.pdf>> Our next conference call is July 16, 2012 at 3pm ET.
>> ________________________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
>>> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list
>cloud at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud>>> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20120625/2540c0fe/attachment-0002.html>