Minutes of IPP Working Group Meeting January 24-25, 2001 1. Meeting Attendees Shigeru Ueda Canon Lee Farrell Canon Information Systems Ron Bergman Hitachi-Koki Harry Lewis IBM Jason Oliver Kodak Stuart Rowley Kyocera Don Wright Lexmark Gail Songer Netreon Bill Wagner NETsilicon Gene Zary Quest Software Satoshi Fujitani Ricoh Craig Whittle Sharp Peter Zehler Xerox 2. Administrivia Ron Bergman led the IPP meeting and provided the suggested agenda topics: - Status of documents not otherwise on the agenda - Final voting process to become PWG standards - PWG documents completing PWG Last Call - Issue 3.2 from the October 17-20 bake-off in Boston - IPP URL scheme (Internet-Draft) - SSDP advertisement of IPP Printers - Registering Printer MIB and Bluetooth Print Document Formats as MIME media types - PWG Media Size Name project 3. Status of Documents not Otherwise on the Agenda The following status for various IPP documents was briefly identified: - Implementer's Guide – need another WG Last Call with Bakeoff3 resolutions - Job and Printer Set operations – must address IETF Area Director (AD) editorial comments before IESG Last Call - Collection attribute syntax – must address AD editorial comments before IESG Last Call - Job Progress Attributes – must address AD editorial comments before IESG Last Call - Requirements for IPP Notifications – must address AD editorial comments before IESG Last Call - Event Notification Specification – must address AD editorial comments before IESG Last Call - Printer Installation Extension – Hugo Parra will update with security - The indp URL scheme notification delivery method – Ira McDonald working on this - The ippget URL scheme notification delivery method – Ira McDonald/Bob Herriot working on this The group reviewed the comments from AD Ned Freed (refer to his Dec 5 e-mail: "AD review of a bunch of IPP documents".), reviewing some of the group could not understand why these comments had not yet been addressed and/or included in the Internet-Draft documents. It was suggested that Tom Hastings should be contacted to determine the reason for any delay or obstacles preventing this progress. ACTION: Tom Hastings will address/incorporate the AD comments and update the Internet-Drafts. 4. Final Voting Process to Become PWG Standards Two of the three documents that were recently voted on for acceptance as PWG specifications were approved: - IPP "output-bin" attribute extension - IPP "finishings" attribute values extension Peter Zehler explained that there was a complaint about the Override Attributes for Documents and Pages document, resulting in a few changes: - The document will be classified as "Experimental" - The conformance section will change to allow support of document exceptions, without support of page exceptions ACTION: Don Wright will investigate a process for classifying "Experimental" specification documents within the ISTO/PWG. 5. PWG Documents Completing PWG Last Call It was explained that the IPP Production Printing Attributes - Set1 document received no negative comments, so it will proceed to the next step, PWG-IPP balloting. 6. Issue 3.2 from the October 17-20 Bake-off in Boston At the previous meeting, "Resolution 2" was proposed and agreed: - Resolution 2 allows the vendor to determine when a challenge is issued. The vendor is free to use the contents of the HTTP request to determine if the operation mandates a challenge. The client must accept and respond to a challenge at any time. However, in subsequent e-mail and teleconference(s), it was suggested that this solution is invalid—and the issue remains open. After discussing the topic with Larry Masinter, [ex-]Chair of the HTTP WG, some people are not convinced that Resolution 2 is invalid. The group had a long discussion of the possible alternatives—connection-based or content-based, including a review of Carl Kugler's January 16 e-mail: "Bakeoff issues 3.1 and 3.2." Bill Wagner noted that this issue revolves around the interpretation of allowable HTTP behavior—and perhaps should be out of scope for the IPP WG. Since the group has already resolved that sending a zero-length POST is invalid, he believes that the interoperability issue should be closed. After further discussion of Bill's observation, the group agreed to be silent about HTTP interpretation. Instead, it was suggested that a comment in the Implementer's Guide should be added to clarify the possible different behaviors that could be expected. ACTION: Pete Zehler and Tom Hastings will update the Implementer's Guide to reflect the possible concerns related to Issue 3.2 of the Bakeoff. It was noted that a Validate Job command will successfully generate a challenge— regardless of how the HTTP security might be implemented. 7. IPP URL Scheme (Internet-Draft) The group reviewed Bob Herriot's January 15 and 17 e-mail messages about "comments on http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipp-url-scheme-00.txt." The following modifications were agreed: - Add the clause, "unless explicitly configured by system administrators or site policies" to Section 5.2 Conformance Requirements for IPP Printers. - Include an explanation of what "host" and "path" mean in the context of a printer. A new section 4.2 should be created to include Bob's [possibly modified] proposed text. - Should clarify that the scheme "ipp" applies only to the transport and encoding defined by RFC 2910 and successor documents. [If the IPP model (RFC 2911) is the basis for some other transport (e.g. BEEP) or some other encoding (e.g. XML), a new scheme with a name other than "ipp" must be defined.] A few people indicated confusion about why Ira "… was directed to REMOVE discussion of backward compatibility with IPP/1.0, because the IETF documents (RFC 2565/2566) for IPP/1.0 do not specify the use of the 'ipp:' URL scheme (although many implementations of IPP/1.0 correctly accept and process 'ipp:' URL schemes in clients and servers)." After some discussion—and disagreement with Ira's rationale—the group agreed to put this information back into the ipp-url-scheme document. Don Wright objected to the text in Section 5.2, item b). The group agreed to change the wording to: b) SHOULD reject otherwise valid IPP Jobs on any port other than 631 (IANA- assigned default port for IPP) from IPP Clients that follow required client authentication and security mechanisms, unless explicitly configured by system administrators or site policies; Don also raised the question of why the MIME type registration is apparently "buried" as an appendix of this document. Shouldn't this information be a stand-alone [separate] document? Or at least reflected in the document title? ACTION: Carl-Uno Manros and/or Ira McDonald will explain why the MIME type registration was included in the ipp-url-scheme document—or publish as a separate Internet-Draft. ACTION: Ira McDonald will update the ipp-url-scheme document to include the agreed modifications. 8. SSDP Advertisement of IPP Printers Peter Zehler explained the proposed process of using SSDP to advertise—and discover— IPP Printers. Peter will be publishing a draft document that is planned to become a PWG specification. 9. PWG Media Size Name Project Ron Bergman reviewed his compilation of media sizes and names. He has created a document with this list, but he was unable to send it to the e-mail reflector. There was a very long discussion about how to label the various categories of Media Size names, what information should be conveyed in the document, and whether the origins of legacy names should be identified. There was also some concern about whether the proposed names should be easily parsed to generate the legacy names. The set of names that Ron presented included Legacy Names (as previously used by DPA, Printer MIB, and other Standards Organizations), Alias Names (if commonly used shorter names exist), and Self-Describing Names (to be used by UPnP, and hopefully adopted by other organizations in the future) that include the size information in the name. The convention used for Self-Describing Name was explained as follows: If the name begins with "na-", then the units are 1/1000 inch. Otherwise, the units are 1/10 millimeter. ACTION: Ron Bergman will update the document to reflect the modifications discussed at the meeting. The question was raised about how the PWG would make this list more visible to other organizations for review of completeness and possible future update. ACTION: After PWG approval of the Media Size/Name list, Don Wright will distribute the publication to other organizations and request feedback. 10. Registering Printer MIB and Bluetooth Print Document Formats as MIME Media Types The document containing the list of Printer MIB, UPnP, and Bluetooth Print Document Formats was reviewed. Tom Hastings (not present) had authored the document and requested input via e-mail on those entries that still need information. Tom had highlighted several issues/questions within the document, and the group discussed and attempted to resolve each of them. However in most cases, the attendees were unable to resolve—or adequately interpret—the issues. Harry Lewis modified the document entries for which the attendees were able to provide information or close the issue. He will distribute the modified document to the PWG e- mail list [and for Tom's next revision.] The group decided that the entry for HP's sPCL should be removed. ACTION: Representatives from the following companies should provide Tom Hastings with information for empty (decimal) entries in the Document Formats as MIME type document: - Epson – entries 9 and 10 - Xerox – entry 12 - Hewlett Packard – entry 47 The group then identified the high[er] priority formats in need of MIME registration: - PJL - IPDS - PPDS - Escape P - Interpress - LineData - SCS - CodeV - DSC-DSE - NPAP - Pages - LIPS [Canon has already registered this, but the document does not yet reflect it] - CaPSL [Canon has already registered this, but the document does not yet reflect it] - XES - TIPSI - Prescribe - LinePrinter - XJCL - RPDL - Intermec IPL - UBIFingerprint - UBIDirectProtocol - Fujitsu - vCal - vNote - vMessage - XHTML-Print [Don Wright will register this] IPP meeting adjourned.