*Internet Standard*
> Begin forwarded message:
>> From: The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org>
> Subject: Protocol Action: Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics to Internet Standard
> Date: June 25, 2018 at 5:15:02 PM EDT
> To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce at ietf.org>
> Cc: The IESG <iesg at ietf.org>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba at computer.org>, draft-sweet-rfc2911bis at ietf.org, draft-sweet-rfc2910bis at ietf.org, barryleiba at computer.org, rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org> Resent-From: alias-bounces at ietf.org> Resent-To: msweet at apple.com, blueroofmusic at gmail.com>> The IESG has approved changing the status of the following document:
> - Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics
> (rfc8011) to Internet Standard
>> This protocol action is documented at:
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-change-ipp-to-internet-standard/>> A URL of the affected document is:
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8011/>> Status Change Details:
>> As specified in RFC 6410:
>> (1) There are at least two independent interoperating implementations
> with widespread deployment and successful operational experience.
>> - Over 98% of all digital network printers shipped in the last
> decade support IPP/1.1 (originally defined in RFC 2910/2911,
> September 2000).
>> (2) There are no errata against the specification that would cause a
> new implementation to fail to interoperate with deployed ones.
>> - There are currently no errata against RFC 8010/8011.
>> (3) There are no unused features in the specification that greatly
> increase implementation complexity.
>> - There are no unused features in RFC 8010/8011.
>> - The Purge-Jobs operation (from RFC 2911) is DEPRECATED in
> RFC 8011 (page 73) with "SHOULD NOT support" because it
> destroys Printer accounting implementation. This operation
> has never been widely implemented in digital network printers.
>> - The Restart-Job operation (from RFC 2911) is DEPRECATED in
> RFC 8011 (page 89) with "SHOULD NOT support" because it
> destroys Printer accounting implementation. This operation
> has never been widely implemented in digital network printers.
>> (4) If the technology required to implement the specification
> requires patented or otherwise controlled technology, then the
> set of implementations must demonstrate at least two independent,
> separate and successful uses of the licensing process.
>> - There is no patented or otherwise controlled technology that
> is required to implement IPP/1.1 per RFC 8010/8011.
>> Personnel
>> Alexey Melnikov is the responsible Area Director.
>>>
_________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20180625/af27e0c3/attachment.html>