On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Richard Shockey wrote:
> Internet Print Protocol and Internet Fax (ipp2ifax)
[...]
> The purpose of the work group will be to investigate and document those
> elements of IPP that qualify as a facsimile service.
"... and extend IPP where necessary to more closely perform the functions
of facsimile." [see below]
> A goal of the WG will be to note the legal as well as general custom
> and practice of GSTN FAX and apply those principals to IPP
> transactions.
>> Current work within the IETF on FAX
Clarify by changing to:
"Current work within the IETF's Internet Fax Working Group ..."
> has centered on using Internet Mail standards in a Store and Forward
> mode. Considerable evidence exists that there is a need for protocols
> that more closely approximate the real-time and point to point model
> of traditional GSTN FAX.
>> Traditional GSTN FAX is limited to the type and quality of output.
> IETF Internet Fax standards are also limited to a specific set of MIME
> Content-Types specified in RFC 2301. IPP has no such restrictions on
> the quality of document to be printed or displayed.
>> The WG will not propose any revisions to the current Internet Print Protocol
> specifications but may use normal IPP Attribute Extensions and behavioral
> practice requirements to facilitate interoperability with GSTN FAX and RFC2305
> using elements of RFC2301 as needed.
I could see the IFX group proposing extensions or revisions to IPP,
actually -- for example a mechanism to indicate This Is a Fax and should
contain timestamps. I wouldn't want such extensions to be out of scope.
> The WG will not propose any revisions or extensions to IETF Internet Fax
> standards [RFC2305] and its successors.
>> The group will take note of other areas within the IETF that may have direct
> bearing on IPP and FAX interworking.
>> Relevant areas include:
>> - Security, Authentication and Encryption (SSL3 -TLS)
> - Sender Identification (vCard)
Conneg?
> The working group will take note of quality of service issues.
On the Internet, "Quality of Service" has distinct meaning -- be careful
here. QoS usually means bounded delay of packet delivery -- much
different from what you mean (which is likely bounded delay of the
physical output).
Perhaps something like: "The WG will attempt to provide mechanisms to
allow interoperable implementations to be created which closely emulate
the existing end-user- expected functionality of fax." but shorter-winded.
[...]
-Dan Wing