[IPP] New draft of IPP Authentication Methods posted

Wed Jan 16 20:25:08 UTC 2019

I just posted an updated draft with the "prototype" status:

https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116.pdf <https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116.pdf> 
https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116.odt <https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116.odt> 
https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116-rev.pdf <https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116-rev.pdf> 
https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116-rev.odt <https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190116-rev.odt> 

I'll post a "new draft" notification, and either include prototype statement within and/or separately next.

Smith

> On Jan 16, 2019, at 1:18 PM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> Prototype is not required for a Best Practice, but it's been done.
> 
> NOTHING in Process/3.0 or our PWG tradition says that, in fact,
> everything has to be prototyped. A simple email from Smith that
> says what HP has implemented would be a plus. Apple CUPS
> has certainly done 'negotiate' and 'certificate' right?  What about
> 'oauth'?
> 
> But specs that get Formal Vote do need to go Interim --> Prototype
> --> Stable (and not just LC/Vote on Interim). I'd be happy to say that
> the current draft was *meant* to be Prototype and voice vote it into
> Stable for WG LC.
> 
> Cheers,
> - Ira
> 
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Metadata Access Protocol SG
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
> Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
> http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/168dCNkjqjfkZGOAcmDqAK?domain=sites.google.com>
> http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/NmIWCOYkrki1Ny7JIvWMjx?domain=sites.google.com>
> mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com <mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
> PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 2:09 PM Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com <mailto:msweet at apple.com>> wrote:
> Ira,
> 
> I don’t think Process/3.0 requires prototyping for non-standards track documents. All I see is a prototyping requirement for candidate standards.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Jan 16, 2019, at 12:22 PM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com <mailto:smith.kennedy at hp.com>> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Ira,
>> 
>>> On Jan 16, 2019, at 10:05 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com <mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Smith,
>>> 
>>> This *should* have been labeled Prototype (not current Interim)
>> 
>> I remembered that when I started editing but forgot to change it. I will that change and post an updated draft to nudge that forward.
>> 
>>> and there
>>> should be an email Prototype report (e.g.,"this spec documents all of the
>>> existing IPP Authentication Methods, all of which have implementations")
>>> so that, by voice approval, we can move it to Stable draft and WG LC.
>> 
>> I know HP products have supported 'none', 'requesting-user-name', 'basic', and 'digest'. I suppose I need to solicit feedback from other members on whether the authentication methods not implemented by HP might be implemented by them? Has any other vendor or project implemented support for 'negotiate', 'oauth', or 'certificate'?
>> 
>>> 
>>> Bear in mind that, for a Best Practices document, we actually also need
>>> PWG LC *and* PWG Formal Vote (not just PWG Call for Objections),
>>> because this is a new spec and not errata and that's our process for
>>> Best Practices documents.
>> 
>> Thanks - I forgot about that. Even better reason to finish it off.
>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> - Ira
>>> 
>>> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>>> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
>>> Co-Chair - TCG Metadata Access Protocol SG
>>> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
>>> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
>>> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
>>> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
>>> Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
>>> http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/168dCNkjqjfkZGOAcmDqAK?domain=sites.google.com>
>>> http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/NmIWCOYkrki1Ny7JIvWMjx?domain=sites.google.com>
>>> mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com <mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
>>> PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 3:45 PM Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com <mailto:smith.kennedy at hp.com>> wrote:
>>> Greetings again,
>>> 
>>> I'm hoping that we can discuss using this revision to start the Working Group Last Call. I'd like to discuss that at this week's IPP WG teleconference.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Smith
>>> 
>>> /**
>>>     Smith Kennedy
>>>     HP Inc.
>>> */
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 9, 2019, at 8:52 AM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com <mailto:smith.kennedy at hp.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> 
>>>> I've posted another incremental draft of IPP Authentication Methods to the PWG FTP site:
>>>> 
>>>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109.pdf <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/GZp4CPNlvlcz0kjOS1CgkJ?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>>>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109.odt <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/iBeeCQWmwmFvXy28Fk1Gg4?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>>>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109-rev.pdf <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/FPA7CR6nxnh4GzMJsq5_Rl?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>>>> https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippauth-20190109-rev.odt <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/WXATCVOrBrcq2RW7skM5-K?domain=ftp.pwg.org>
>>>> 
>>>> This revision adds mention of the "oauth-authorization-server-uri" Printer Description attribute and a reference to PWG 5100.18 (IPP INFRA) since that attribute is listed in the sequence diagram. The -rev is compared against the last reviewed revision (20181109).
>>>> 
>>>> Smith
>>>> 
>>>> /**
>>>> Smith Kennedy
>>>> HP Inc.
>>>> */
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ipp mailing list
>>>> ipp at pwg.org <mailto:ipp at pwg.org>
>>>> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/Wku1CW6vDvhr6WM2i1fD3k?domain=pwg.org>
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ipp mailing list
>>> ipp at pwg.org <mailto:ipp at pwg.org>
>>> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/Wku1CW6vDvhr6WM2i1fD3k?domain=pwg.org>
>> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20190116/1237177f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4263 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20190116/1237177f/attachment.p7s>