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@us.ibm.com
don@lexmark.com on 07/28/99 08:34:05 AM
To: pmp@pwg.org
cc:
Subject: Re: PMP> Pull Print channel information
When is it good enough?
**********************************************
* Don Wright don@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@interlock.lexmark.com on 07/28/99 10:30:21 AM
To: harryl%us.ibm.com@interlock.lexmark.com,
ipp%pwg.org@interlock.lexmark.com, Lloyd Young@LEXMARK,
pmp%pwg.org@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