IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> machine readable etc. - why Harry

RE: IPP> machine readable etc. - why Harry is right

From: Herriot, Robert (Robert.Herriot@pahv.xerox.com)
Date: Wed Aug 23 2000 - 18:02:56 EDT

Next message: McDonald, Ira: "RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM - The IPPNotification I-Ds will now go the IESG)]"

Previous message: Herriot, Robert: "RE: IPP> machine readable etc. - why Harry is right"
Maybe in reply to: pmoore@peerless.com: "IPP> machine readable etc. - why Harry is right"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM [mailto:kugler@us.ibm.com]

... snip

> But we probably need some way to "expire"
> undelivered notifications, so they don't build up
> indefinitely if clients
> go away. Could be a simple, specified maximum guaranteed
> retention time
> for undelivered notifications, or an attribute (settable or not).

I assumed that we would use the same "lease" mechanism as in "ippget".
Unlike "ippget", the Printer doesn't have to try to be intelligent about the
lease time. It can always pick a small number, such as 30 seconds for all
leases and assume that the client will perform Get-Notifications within a
few seconds.

Next message: McDonald, Ira: "RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM - The IPPNotification I-Ds will now go the IESG)]"
Previous message: Herriot, Robert: "RE: IPP> machine readable etc. - why Harry is right"
Maybe in reply to: pmoore@peerless.com: "IPP> machine readable etc. - why Harry is right"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 23 2000 - 18:12:31 EDT