IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> Does the world need a robust host-to-device network

Re: IPP> Does the world need a robust host-to-device network

Philip Thambidurai (pthambid@okidata.com)
Wed, 11 Feb 1998 07:56:04 -0500


I would strong argue in favor of such a protocol (what people are
referring to as host-to-device), specifically for the Intranet
environment, where we have to support several different proprietary
protocols/standards today. This new protocol should cover all aspects
of a distributed printing system (mananagement, queues/spooling,
etc.). IPP is fine for the Internet. But the majority of print jobs
will be local (Intranet). I believe this Intranet printing protocol
will be far more significant than IPP, if it covers all aspects of
printing, not just job submission. Of course, this might be a
difficult proposition because of the "entrenched"
protocols/interests/vendors.



We could always consider this "total printing system" as the focus or
central thrust of IPP Version 2. I think the existing IPP Requirements
spec is general enough.


In summary, two issues stand out to me:


1. It does not appear that IPP will have much or any impact on the
multitude of printing solutions in use today (for the Intranet).

2. Lack of a ***complete*** standard printing solution within the LAN
environment (Intranets included). Today we have to use proprietary
solutions.

Philip Thambidurai

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: IPP> Does the world need a robust host-to-device network pri
Author: Jay Martin <jkm@underscore.com> at INTERNET
Date: 2/10/98 5:52 PM

Paul Moore wrote in the "Submission vs. Monitoring and Management"
thread:

> Now if somebody wants to have a separate debate about writing a really
> robust protocol for interfacing to printers (and I mean the real hardware
> not some logical abstraction) then that will suit me fine. Lets start a new
> track and call it, say, NLS (Not LPD and SNMP). This is what I initially
> wanted to do but could not persuade enough people.

Paul, what people were you unable to persuade? Internal Microsoft
folks, or PWG folks, or both or what?

For fear of sounding as if I'm beating a dead horse to death:

Enterprise environments desparately need a fully functional
host-to-device protocol for network printing.

Am I alone in this belief??? (I know for a fact I am NOT along.)

Will others in the PWG share their views using this new thread?
If this belief turns out to be a minority view, then I'd certainly
like to know (so I can drop the subject once and for all, if so).

...jay

----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- JK Martin | Email: jkm@underscore.com --
-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
-- Hudson, NH 03051-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
----------------------------------------------------------------------