It occurs that, in pull print scenarios, it would be helpful if the Printer MIB
channel information indicated which pull print protocols are supported.
I don't think this is addressed by the new chIPP(44) definition. Also, there are
legacy HTTP pull print scenarios with the same requirement not addressed by
chPortHTTP(42).
Since any implementation is likely to support more than one pull print protocol,
this is a case where multiplicity makes sense.
I suggest that we need two new channel types, chIPPPull(45), and chPortHTTP(46),
each allowing multiple Pull Print URI schemes to be presented (such as FTP,
Gopher, WAIS, HTTP).
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
harryl at us.ibm.com