IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> Revised SLP 'printer:' template for comments

RE: IPP> Revised SLP 'printer:' template for comments

Manros, Carl-Uno B (cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Mon, 4 Jan 1999 17:02:54 -0800

Bob,
=A0
I welcome this attempt to get a simpler SLP solution and in practice I =
think
we will find few printers that have more than one URI.
However, your assumption in a) that you could use 'printer-name' to =
find out
whether a printer has several URIs does not
seem correct. There is no guarantee that "printer-name' values are =
unique,
even within the same domain (at least not according to IPP).
=A0
Carl-Uno

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Herriot [mailto:robert.herriot@Eng.Sun.COM]
Sent: Monday, January 04, 1999 4:38 PM
To: Ira McDonald; imcdonal@sdsp.mc.xerox.com; ipp@pwg.org; =
srvloc@srvloc.org
Subject: Re: IPP> Revised SLP 'printer:' template for comments

At our Tucson meeting, the IPP group agreed with James Kempf that there =

should be a separate SLP entry for each URI and that the URI associated =
with

the entry would be the printer's URI.=A0 Ira, I know that you disagreed =
with=20
this direction.

If we stay with this decision, it implies to me that there is=20
=A0=A0 a)=A0 no need for the 'printer-uri-supported' attribute in the =
template. It
can be=20
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 determined by finding all URI's containing a =
'printer-name' with a
particular value.
=A0=A0 b)=A0 'uri-security-supported' contains the security supported =
for the
associated URI and
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 not for other URIs associated with a printer.
=A0=A0 c)=A0 the complexity of two parallel attributes is eliminated.

Bob Herriot