Hi Mike and Pete,
What about a simple TXT record discovery attribute for Push capability
that's boolean?
Since a bunch of URI schemes are conditionally mandatory anyway, that gets
90% of
the discovery need.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusichttp://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
> Pete,
>> I'm not sure it makes much sense to include the push schemes in the TXT
> record since you need to load the hardcopy to be scanned on a particular
> device - probably better to browse for _ipp._tcp,_scan and then do a
> Get-Printer-Attributes to get the values you are looking for, *if* you
> really wanted an application that could help a user find a MFD with push
> scan capabilities.
>> The more likely use case is that you browse to find the MFD you just
> loaded the hardcopy in, send an Identify-Printer to confirm, and then send
> a Get-Printer-Attributes to get the MFD capabilities (which might include
> whether push scan to an email address is possible, for example). For that
> you don't need the push schemes in the TXT record...
>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
>> Mike,
>>>> That works for me and for some internal requests. The additional request
> for having Push optional would be to include a discovery attribute to
> locate Scanners with push capability.
>>>> What do you think about a comma separated list of push URL schemes and an
> empty list indicates a Pull only scanner?
>>>>>> Peter Zehler
>> Xerox Research Center Webster
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com> Office: +1 (585) 265-8755
>> Mobile: +1 (585) 329-9508
> FAX: +1 (585) 265-7441
> US Mail: Peter Zehler
> Xerox Corp.
> 800 Phillips Rd.
> M/S 128-25E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701
>>>> *From:* ipp-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org<ipp-bounces at pwg.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Michael Sweet
> *Sent:* Monday, February 10, 2014 3:07 PM
> *To:* Zehler, Peter
> *Cc:* IPP at pwg.org> *Subject:* Re: [IPP] IPP Scan - Is Push scanning mandatory?
>>>> Pete,
>>>> I thought we were requiring pull scan and recommending push scan because
> low-end devices couldn't retry a push automatically. Any push-related
> attributes would be conditionally required if the service supports push.
> And any retry-related attributes would be conditionally required for
> services that do output spooling.
>>>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 2:59 PM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>> I have conflicting notes. I have some Push scan related attributes marked
> as conditionally mandatory while Pull and Push scan are listed as required.
>>>> My opinion is that Push and Pull scanning are mandated and therefore the
> Push related attributes are also mandatory. For Push scanning the "http",
> "https", "ftp" and "ftps URI schemes MUST be supported.
>>>> Any objections?
>>>> Peter Zehler
>> Xerox Research Center Webster
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com> Office: +1 (585) 265-8755
>> Mobile: +1 (585) 329-9508
> FAX: +1 (585) 265-7441
> US Mail: Peter Zehler
> Xerox Corp.
> 800 Phillips Rd.
> M/S 128-25E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701
>>>> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>>>> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
>>>>> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
>>> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20140210/0ffbd415/attachment.html>