# 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.
<<< Translation: look, it's terrible, but we have too much invested
<<< to drop it like the brick around our necks that it is
<<<
I spent an hour at lunch today working on how I would translate what the
IPP Model folks have presented into LPR/LPD protocol, and strangely
enough there is not that much backing and filling to do.
The easiest way to do the translation would be to resurrect the old
job template stuff (don't hit me! don't hit me) and indicate that a
LPR spooled job would be translated into a IPP job via this template.
Similarly for status information - a 'reverse mapping' is even easier.
Job removal is almost trivial.
Patrick Powell