[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Last Call: Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Event Notifications and Subscriptions to Proposed Standard
Carl and Harry,
Thanks for the response. I will also wait for Tom's comments.
Michelle
IANA
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:49 PM
To: IANA
Cc: bob@herriot.com; carl@manros.com; hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com;
iesg@ietf.org; ned.freed@mrochek.com
Subject: RE: Last Call: Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Event
Notifications and Subscriptions to Proposed Standard
Regarding draft-ietf-ipp-not-spec-10
1. Accept IANA recommendation and Ned Freed's wording regarding 24.7.2.3
IANA Registrations
2. Ned is correct in pointing out that registration for Event and Delivery
methods for IPP will be requested in companion documents and that, as the
draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-08.txt is the only such request at this time. "IPP
Get" is the The only other registration of this type that I anticipate in
the near term is for e-mail notification. I need to check with authors of
that delivery method to see how eminent this may be.
3. Confirm 6 registrations of ENUM ATTRIBUTE VALUES
4. Confirm 28 registrations in the ATTRIBUTES IPP registry
5. Confirm that there are 9 (as listed by Ned), not 8, registrations in the
OPERATIONS IPP registry
6. There are two status codes to register "successful" and "client-error"...
(not 4).
7. Yes, there are 2 ATTRIBUTE GROUP TAGS registered
Regarding draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-08
1. Only one registration ("ippget") in the KEYWORD ATTRIBUTE VALUES IPP
registry is requested in draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-08 registrations. What
may appear as a cut and paste error is the author's attempt to reference the
"base" Notification specification reflecting usage of this keyword.
2. 1 registration in the ENUM ATTRIBUTE VALUES IPP registry is correct.
3. 1 registration in the ATTRIBUTES IPP registry is correct.
4. 1 registration in the OPERATIONS IPP registry is correct.
5. 1 registration in the STATUS CODES IPP registry is correct.
6. Ned is correct in pointing out that draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-08 should
request an entry in the new Events and Delivery Methods registry for IPP!
Please note that one of the authors (Tom Hastings) may be on vacation or
short term sabbatical as my attempts to collaborate a response have failed
and I have heard that he is out of the country. I will get further
clarification on Tom's whereabouts and ability to respond.
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
----------------------------------------------
ned.freed@mrochek.com
01/31/2003 03:57 PM
To: IANA <iana@iana.org>
cc: iesg@ietf.org, bob@herriot.com,
hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com, Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, carl@manros.com
Subject: RE: Last Call: Internet Printing Protocol (IPP):
Event Notifications and Subscriptions to Proposed Standard
> IESG:
> The IANA has reviewed the following Internet-Drafts which
> are in Last Call and has the following comments with
> regards to the publication of these documents:
> o "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Event Notifications and
> Subscriptions"
> <draft-ietf-ipp-not-spec-10.txt>
> We would like to suggest in section 24.7.2.3, that there is
> mention of the reviewer sending a message or contacting the
> IANA when a request is ready for registration. Adding this
> will make it a bit more clear.
OK, how about:
24.7.2.3 IANA Registration
Provided that the Delivery Method registration proposal has either
passed review or has been successfully appealed to the IESG, the IANA
will be notified by the delivery method reviewer and asked to register
the Delivery Method and make it available to the community.
I can make this change with an RFC Editor note if there are no other
changes.
> We understand a new sub-registry in the IPP Registry will
> be created for "Events and Delivery Methods". Are there any
> defined registrations for this registry in this document?
Not in this document, however, the companion document
draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-08.txt registers one. I expect this to be the only
registration made in the short term.
> We understand the following registrations will be made upon
> approval of this document:
> 6 registrations in the "ENUM ATTRIBUTE VALUES" IPP registry
> (the value will need to be confirmed with the IPP expert)
check.
> 28 registrations in the "ATTRIBUTES" IPP registry
check.
> 8 registrations in the "OPERATIONS" IPP registry
There are 9 by my count:
1 Cancel-Subscription Operation RFC NNNN 11.2.7
2 Create-Job-Subscriptions Operation RFC NNNN 11.1.1
3 Create-Printer-Subscriptions Operation RFC NNNN 11.1.2
4 Get-Printer-Attributes - Extensions RFC NNNN 11.2.3
5 Get-Subscription-Attributes Operation RFC NNNN 11.2.4
6 Get-Subscriptions Operation RFC NNNN 11.2.5
7 Job Creation Operations - Extensions RFC NNNN 11.1.3
8 Renew-Subscription Operation RFC NNNN 11.2.6
9 Validate-Job Operation - Extensions RFC NNNN 11.2.2
> 4 registration in the "STATUS CODES" IPP registry
> (the values will need to be confirmed with the IPP expert)
I only see 2. I think you are misreading table subheadings as entries.
> 2 registrations in the "ATTRIBUTE GROUP TAGS" IPP registry
> (the values will need to be confirmed with the IPP expert)
check.
> o "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): The 'ippget' Delivery Method for
> Event Notifications"
> <draft-ietf-ipp-notify-get-08.txt>
> We understand the following registrations will be made upon
> approval of this document:
> 3 registrations in the "KEYWORD ATTRIBUTE VALUES" IPP registry
I don't think this is correct. It looks to me like the boilerplate from
not-spec is still present. Authors, can you clarify?
> 1 registration in the "ENUM ATTRIBUTE VALUES" IPP registry
> (the value will need to be confirmed with the IPP expert)
check.
> 1 registration in the "ATTRIBUTES" IPP registry
check.
> 1 registration in the "OPERATIONS" IPP registry
check.
> 1 registration in the "STATUS CODES" IPP registry
check.
Authors, shouldn't this document also make an entry in the new "Events
and delivery methods" registry?
Ned