Hi Ira,
I'm wondering why templates for SLPv1 is considered. The only v1
implementation and deployment of recognizable size that I know of
is in Novell's NetWare 5. Is Novell interested in v1 printer
templates?
At Axis, we are implementing v2 precisely because we want to use
the printer services you're defining. I don't think v1 templates
are important unless someone is explicitly requesting it. I know
that Erik and others working with the v2 protocol specifications
would like to see people moving to v2.
/Mikael
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ira McDonald [mailto:imcdonal@sdsp.mc.xerox.com]
> Sent: den 14 januari 1999 02:38
> To: James.Kempf@Eng.Sun.COM; imcdonal@sdsp.mc.xerox.com;
ipp@pwg.org;
> srvloc@srvloc.org
> Subject: Re: IPP> SLP 'printer:' template comments [language]
>
>
> Hi James,
>
> I agree that SLPv2 is RFC 2277 / RFC 1766 compliant. But as I
said
> in my note (I think) we're working on the SLPv2 'printer:'
template
> as the MASTER, from which we will then derive concrete protocol
> templates for SLPv1 usage (quite important to several vendors).
> So the template has the imbedded 'natural-language-configured'
> attribute in order to be fully RFC 2277 compliant EVEN in SLPv1
> environments.
>
> Cheers,
> - Ira McDonald (outside consultant at Xerox)
> High North Inc
> 716-461-5667 (w/ voice mail)
>
--simple boundary--