All,
I am well on my way to documenting all the results from the Bake-Off. I
will be out of the office on Wednesday and expect to have the documents
completed by Thursday. I will send the complete results to the registered
participants and the summary document out to the group at large on Thursday.
I will also be sending out each issue captured at the Bake-Off in separate
mail notes by Thursday also.
For those of you that did not attend the Bake-Off was, as usual, a
tremendous help to the participating implementers. Getting that many
Clients and Printers into one room with all the expertise needed to
troubleshoot any glitches is immensely beneficial. Oak Technologies did a
wonderful job hosting the event. The firewalls and proxies that
participated performed flawlessly allowing us control over IPP traffic
through them. We saw no interactions between the proxies and any security
testing.
Below is a sneak peek at the beginning of the IPP Bake-Off Summary Document.
Pete
___________________________________________________________
Participating companies: Axent Technologies Inc., Canon, Electronics for
Imaging Inc., Epson, IBM, i-data International, Japan Computer Industry,
McAfee.com, Microsoft, Netreon Inc., NETsilicon Inc., Novell, Oak
Technologies, Quality Logic, Ricoh, SEH Computertechnik Gmbh, Xerox
The 18 participants provided 17 IPP Printers, 9 IPP Clients, 2 firewalls and
2 HTTP Proxies. Out of the 153 possible IPP Client/Printer combinations,
151 were tested.
* The overall success rate was 93%.
* Limiting the scope to IPP v1.1 only provided a success rate
of 96%.
* With IPP v1.0 Clients and v1.1 Printers the success rate was
100%.
* The tests with v1.1 Clients and v1.0 Printers resulted in a
success rate of 31% which is not suprising given that some printer
implementations explicitly disallowed that combination. Some Clients were
able to retry in v1.0 mode raising the success rate to 69%. It should also
be noted that for v1.0 Printers that allow v1.1 Clients the success rate was
100%.
The majority of the failures can be attributed to one of two causes. The
major cause of unresolved failures was due to IPP Clients that had problems
with IPP Printers that sent unexpected HTTP "100 continue" messages. This
was recognized as an implementation error. The other cause was v1.0
Printers that explicitly disallowed v1.1 Clients. IPP inherently provides a
mechanism that allows minor version mismatches to be gracefully handled.
The minor version mismatch was recognized as an unecessary printer
restriction.
___________________________________________________________________
Peter Zehler
XEROX
Xerox Architecture Center
Email: Peter.Zehler at usa.xerox.com
Voice: (716) 265-8755
FAX: (716) 265-8792
US Mail: Peter Zehler
Xerox Corp.
800 Phillips Rd.
M/S 139-05A
Webster NY, 14580-9701