Sorry, Don. It occurred to me that this would be viewed as a late monkey wrench.
But, the recommendation results from the difference between writing a standard
specification and implementing one. If any changes or additions result from my
suggestion, I definitely want them to be compatible with possible existing
implementations of the latest Printer MIB.
It's unfortunate that the Printer MIB update has been hung out to dry for so
long that some have given up hope and some have decided to go ahead an implement
without the benefit of shared experience. I'm just sharing... which is what I've
always thought the standards maint process was all about.
Notice I didn't suggest anything related to timing of the Printer MIB. I feel
like type 2 enums should be asych with standards releases.
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
harryl at us.ibm.comdon at lexmark.com on 07/28/99 08:34:05 AM
To: pmp at pwg.org
cc:
Subject: Re: PMP> Pull Print channel information
When is it good enough?
**********************************************
* Don Wright don at lexmark.com *
* Director, Strategic & Technical Alliances *
* Lexmark International *
* 740 New Circle Rd *
* Lexington, Ky 40550 *
* 606-232-4808 (phone) 606-232-6740 (fax) *
**********************************************
imcdonal%sdsp.mc.xerox.com at interlock.lexmark.com on 07/28/99 10:30:21 AM
To: harryl%us.ibm.com at interlock.lexmark.com,
ipp%pwg.org at interlock.lexmark.com, Lloyd Young at LEXMARK,
pmp%pwg.org at interlock.lexmark.com
cc: (bcc: Don Wright/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject: Re: PMP> Pull Print channel information
Hi Harry,
I'm a little confused by your note. Shouldn't we just *add*
a keyword to the existing chIPP and chHTTP channel types,
to list the supported 'pull' print URI schemes?
Separately, you've reminded me that Xerox developers have
been bugging me recently to request the addition of a
new channel type for Email-to-Print. I'd tentatively
suggest that this new channel be 'chSMTPPrint'.
Cheers,
- Ira McDonald
High North Inc