GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc3997

Network Working Group T. Hastings, Ed. Request for Comments: 3997 Xerox Corporation Category: Informational R. K. deBry

                                             Utah Valley State College
                                                              H. Lewis
                                                       IBM Corporation
                                                            March 2005
                 Internet Printing Protocol (IPP):
                 Requirements for IPP Notifications

Status of This Memo

 This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
 not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
 memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).

Abstract

 This document is one of a set of documents that together describe all
 aspects of the Internet Printing Protocol (IPP).  IPP is an
 application-level protocol that can be used for distributed printing
 on the Internet.  There are multiple parts to IPP, but the primary
 architectural components are the Model, the Protocol, and an
 interface to Directory Services.  This document provides a statement
 of the requirements for notifications as an optional part of an IPP
 Service.

Table of Contents

 1.   Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
 2.   Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
 3.   Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
 4.   Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
 5.   Security Considerations for IPP Notifications Requirements. . 12
 6.   Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
 7.   IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
 8.   References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
      8.1.  Normative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
      8.2.  Informative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
 9.   Appendix A: Description of the Base IPP Documents . . . . . . 15
 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
 Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 1] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

1. Introduction

 This document is one of a set of documents that together describe all
 aspects of the Internet Printing Protocol (IPP).  IPP is an
 application level protocol that can be used for distributed printing
 on the Internet.  There are multiple parts to IPP, but the primary
 architectural components are the Model, the Protocol, and an
 interface to Directory Services.  This document provides a statement
 of the requirements for notifications as an optional part of an IPP
 Service.  See section 10 for a description of the base IPP documents.
 The scope of this requirements document covers functionality used by
 the following kinds of IPP Users: End Users, Print Administrators,
 and Operators.  See [RFC3995] for the extensions to the Internet
 Printing Protocol/1.0 (IPP) [RFC2565], [RFC2566], IPP/1.1 [RFC2911],
 [RFC2910], and future versions.

2. Terminology

 It is necessary to define a set of terms to be able to clearly
 express the requirements for notification services in an IPP System.

2.1. Job-Submitting End User

 A human end user who submits a print job to an IPP Printer.  This
 person may or may not be within the same security domain as the
 Printer.  This person may or may not be geographically near the
 printer.

2.2. Administrator

 A human user who established policy for and configures the print
 system.

2.3. Operator

 A human user who carries out the policy established by the
 Administrator and controls the day-to-day running of the print
 system.

2.4. Job-Submitting Application

 An application (for example, a batch application), acting on behalf
 of a Job Submitting End User, that submits a print job to an IPP
 Printer.  The application may or may not be within the same security
 domain as the Printer.  This application may or may not be
 geographically near the printer.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 2] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

2.5. Security Domain

 For the purposes of this discussion, the set of network components
 that can communicate without going through a proxy or firewall.  A
 security domain may be geographically very large; for example,
 anywhere within example.com.

2.6. IPP Client

 The software component that sends IPP requests to an IPP Printer
 object and accepts IPP responses from an IPP Printer.

2.7. Job Recipient

 A human who is the ultimate consumer of the print job.  In many cases
 this will be the same person as the Job-Submitting End User, but this
 need not always be the case.  For example, if I use IPP to print a
 document on a printer in a business partner's office, I am the Job-
 Submitting End User, and the person whom I intend the document for in
 my business partner's office is the Job Recipient.  Since one of the
 goals of IPP is to be able to print near the Job Recipient, we would
 normally expect that person to be in the same security domain as, and
 geographically near, the Printer.  However, this may not always be
 the case.  For example, I submit a print job across the Internet to a
 XYZ's print shop.  I am both the Submitting End User and the Job
 Recipient, but I am neither near nor in the same security domain as
 the Printer.

2.8. Job Recipient Proxy

 A person acting on behalf of the Job Recipient.  The Job Recipient
 Proxy physically picks up the printed document from the Printer if
 the Job Recipient cannot do so.  The Proxy is by definition
 geographically near and in the same security domain as the printer.
 For example, I submit a print job from home to be printed on a
 printer at work.  I'd like my secretary to pick up the print job and
 put it on my desk.  In this case,  I am acting as both a Job-
 Submitting End User and a Job Recipient.  My secretary is acting as a
 Job Recipient Proxy.

2.9. Notification Subscriber

 A client that requests the IPP Printer to send Event Notifications to
 one or more Notification Recipients.  A Notification Subscriber may
 be a Job-Submitting End User or an End User, an Operator, or an
 Administrator that is not submitting a job.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 3] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

2.10. Notification Source

 The entity that sends Event Notifications.

2.11. Notification Recipient

 The entity that receives IPP Notifications about Job and/or Printer
 events.  A Notification Recipient may be a Job Submitting End User, a
 Job-Submitting Application, a Job Recipient, a Job Recipient Proxy,
 an Operator, an Administrator, etc., and his or her representative,
 log file, usage statistics-gathering application, or other active or
 passive entities.

2.12. Notification Recipient Agent

 A program that receives Event Notifications on behalf of the
 Notification Recipient.  The agent may take some action on behalf of
 the recipient, forward the notification to the recipient via some
 alternative means (for example, page the recipient), or queue the
 notification for later retrieval by the recipient.

2.13. Event

 An Event is an occurrence (either expected or unexpected) within the
 printing system of a change of state, condition, or configuration of
 a Job or Printer object.

2.14. Event Notification

 When an event occurs, an Event Notification is generated that fully
 describes the event (what the event was, where it occurred, when it
 occurred, etc.).  Event Notifications are delivered to all the
 Notification Recipients that are subscribed to that Event, if any.
 The Event Notification is delivered to the address of the
 Notification Recipient by using the notification delivery method
 defined in the subscription.  However, an Event Notification is sent
 ONLY if there is a corresponding subscription.

2.15. Notification Subscription

 A Notification Subscription is a request by a Notification Subscriber
 to the IPP Printer to send Event Notifications to specified
 Notification Recipient(s) when an event occurs.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

2.16. Notification Attributes

 IPP Objects (for example, a print job) from which notification are
 being sent may have associated attributes.  A user may want to have
 one or more of these returned along with a particular notification.
 In general, these may include any attribute associated with the
 object emitting the notification.  Examples include the following:
   number-of-intervening jobs
   job-k-octets
   job-k-octets processed
   job impressions
   job-impressions-interpreted
   job-impressions-completed
   impressionsCompletedCurrentCopy (job MIB)
   sheetCompletedCopyNumber (job MIB)
   sheetsCompletedDocumentNumber (job MIB)
   Copies-requested
   Copy-type
   Output-destination
   Job-state-reasons
   Job ID
   Printer URI
   Subscription ID (for job independent subscription)

2.17. Notification Delivery Method (or Delivery Method for Short)

 Event Notifications are delivered by using a Delivery Method.  An
 example of a Delivery Method is email.

2.18. Immediate Notification

 Notifications sent to the Notification Recipient or the Notification
 Recipient's agent in such a way that the notification arrives
 immediately, within the limits of common addressing, routing, network
 congestion, and quality of service.

2.19. Store-and-Forward Notification

 Notifications that are not necessarily delivered to Notification
 Recipients immediately but are queued for delivery by an intermediate
 network application, for later retrieval.  Email is an example of a
 store-and-forward notification delivery method.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 5] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

2.20. Reliable Delivery of Notifications

 Notifications that are delivered by a reliable delivery of packets or
 character stream, with acknowledgement and retry, so that delivery of
 the notification is guaranteed within determinate time limits.  For
 example, if the Notification Recipient has logged off and gone home
 for the day, an immediate notification cannot be guaranteed, even
 when sent over a reliable transport, because there is nothing there
 to catch it.  Guaranteed delivery requires both store-and-forward
 notification and a reliable transport.

2.21. Notification over Unreliable Transport

 Notifications are delivered via the fundamental transport address and
 routing framework, but no acknowledgement or retry is required.
 Process-to-process communications, if involved, are unconstrained.

2.22. Human-Consumable Notification

 Notifications intended to be consumed by human end users only.  Email
 would be an example of a Human-Consumable Notification, though it
 could also contain Machine-Consumable Notification.

2.23. Machine-Consumable Notification

 Notifications that are intended for consumption by a program only,
 such as an IPP Client.  Machine-Consumable Notifications may not
 contain human-readable information.  Do we need both human and
 machine? Machine readable is intended for application-to-application
 only.  The Notification Recipient could process the machine-readable
 Event Notification into human-readable format.

2.24. Mixed Notification

 A mixed notification contains both Human-Consumable and Machine-
 Consumable information.

3. Scenarios

 1.   Sitting in my office, I submit a print job to the printer down
      the hall.  I am in the same security domain as the printer and,
      of course, geographically near.  I want to know immediately when
      my print job will be completed (or if there is a problem)
      because the document I am working on is urgent.  I submit the
      print job with the following attributes:

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 6] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

  1. Notification Recipient: Me
  2. Notification Events: All
  3. Notification Attributes: Job-state-reason
  4. Notification Type: Immediate
 2.   Working from home, I submit a print job to the same printer as
      in the previous example.  However, I am not at work, I cannot
      physically get the print file or do anything with it.  It can
      wait until I get to work this afternoon.  However, I'd like my
      secretary to pick up the output and put it on my desk so that it
      doesn't get lost or misfiled.  I'd also like a store-and-forward
      notification sent to my email so that when I get to work I can
      tell whether there was a problem with the print job.  I submit a
      print job with the following attributes:
  1. Notification Recipient: My secretary
  2. Notification Events: Print complete
  3. Notification Type: Immediate
  1. Notification Recipient: Me
  2. Notification Events: Print complete
  3. Notification Attributes: Impressions completed
  4. Notification Type: Store and forward
 3.   Sitting in my office, I submit a print job to a client at an
      engineering firm my company works with on a daily basis.  The
      engineering firm is in Belgium.  I would like my client to know
      when the print job is complete so that she can pick it up from
      the printer in her building.  It is important that she review it
      right away and send her comments back to me.  I submit the print
      job with the following attributes:
  1. Notification Recipient: Client at engineering firm
  2. Notification Events: Print complete
  3. Notification Type: Immediate
  4. Notification Language: French
 4.   From a hotel room, I send a print job to a Kinko's store in the
      town I am working in, in order to get a printed report for the
      meeting I am attending in the morning.  As I'm going out to
      dinner after I get this job submitted, an immediate notification
      won't do me much good.  However, I'd like to check in the
      morning before I drive to the Kinko's store to see whether the
      file has been printed.  An email notification is sufficient for
      this purpose.  I submit the print job with the following
      attributes:

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 7] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

  1. Notification Recipient: Me
  2. Notification Events: Print complete
  3. Notification Type: Store and forward
 5.   I am printing a large, complex print file.  I want to have some
      immediate feedback on the progress of the print job as it
      prints.  I submit the print job with the following attributes:
  1. Notification Recipient: Me
  2. Notification Type: Immediate
  3. Notification Events: All state transitions
  4. Notification Attributes: Impression completed
 6.   I am an operator and one of my duties is to keep the printer
      running.  I subscribe independently from a job submission so
      that my subscription outlasts any particular job.  I subscribe
      with the following attributes:
  1. Notification Recipient: Me
  2. Notification Type: Immediate
  3. Notification Events: All Printer state transitions
  4. Notification Attributes: Printer state, printer state

reasons, device powering up, device powering down

 7.   I am a usage statistics gathering application.  I subscribe
      independently from a job submission so that my subscription
      outlasts any particular job.  My subscription may persist across
      power cycles.  I subscribe with the following attributes:
  1. Notification Recipient: Me
  2. Notification Type: Immediate
  3. Notification Events: Job completion
  4. Notification Attributes: Impression completed, sheets

completed, time submitted, time started, time completed, job

         owner, job size in octets, etc.
 8.   I am a client application program that displays a list of jobs
      currently queued for printing on a printer.  I display the
      "job-name", "job-state", "job-state-reasons", "page-count", and
      "intervening-jobs", either for the user's jobs or for all jobs.
      The window displaying the job list remains open for an
      independent amount of time, and it is desired that it represent
      the current state of the queue.  It is desired that the
      application only perform a slow poll in order to recover from
      any missed notifications.  So the event delivery mechanism
      provides the means to update the screen on all needed changes,
      including querying for some attributes that may not be delivered
      in the Notification.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 8] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

 9.   I am a client application program that displays a list of
      printers.  For each Printer, I display the current state and
      configuration.  The window displaying the printer list remains
      open for an independent amount of time, and it is desired that
      it represent the current state of each printer.  It is desired
      that the application only need to perform a slow poll in order
      to recover from any missed notifications.  So the event delivery
      mechanism provides the means to update the screen on all needed
      changes, including querying for some attributes that may not be
      delivered in the Notification.
 10.  I am an IPP Server that controls one or more devices and that
      implements an IPP Printer object to represent each device.  I
      want to support IPP Notification for each of the IPP Printer
      objects that I implement.  Many of these devices do not support
      notification (or IPP).  So I need to support the IPP
      Notification semantics specified for each IPP Printer object
      myself on behalf of each of the devices that each of the IPP
      Printer objects represents.  When I accept an IPP job creation
      requests, I convert it to what the device will accept.  In some
      cases, I must poll the devices in order to be informed of their
      job and device state and state changes to be able to send IPP
      Notifications to subscribed Notification Recipients.
 11.  I am an IPP Server that controls one or more devices and that
      implements an IPP Printer object to represent each device.  I
      want to support IPP Notification for each of the IPP Printer
      objects that I implement.  These devices all support IPP,
      including IPP Notification.  I would like the design choice for
      supporting IPP Notification for these objects either (1) by
      forwarding the notification to the IPP Printers that I, alone,
      control and have them send the notifications to the intended
      Notification Recipients without my involvement, or (2) by
      replacing the notification submitted with the Job to indicate me
      as the Notification Recipient; in turn I will forward
      Notifications to the Notification Recipients requested by my
      clients.  Most of the rest of the contents of the IPP Job I send
      to the IPP Printers I control will be the same as those that I
      receive from my IPP clients.
 12.  I am an IPP Server that controls one or more devices and that
      implements an IPP Printer object to represent each device.  I
      want to support IPP Notification for each of the IPP Printer
      objects that I implement.  These devices all support IPP,
      including IPP Notification.  Because these IPP Printers MAY also
      be controlled by other servers (using IPP or other protocols), I
      only want job events for the jobs that I send, but I do want
      Printer events all the time, so that I can show proper Printer

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 9] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

      state to my clients.  So I subscribe to these IPP Printers for
      Printer events with a long-standing subscription, with myself as
      the Notification Recipient.  When I get a Job Creation request,
      I decide to which IPP Printer to send the job.  When I do so, I
      also add a job subscription for Job events, with me as the
      Notification Recipient to the job's job subscriptions supplied
      by my clients (this usage is called "piggybacking").  These IPP
      Printers automatically remove their job subscriptions when the
      job finishes, as for all job subscriptions, so that I no longer
      get Job events when my jobs are completed.

4. Requirements

 The following requirements are intended to be met by the IPP
 Notification specification (not the implementation).  The following
 are true for the resulting IPP Notification Specification document:
 1.  It must indicate which of these requirements are REQUIRED and
     which are OPTIONAL for a conforming implementation to support.
     See [RFC2911], section 12.1, for the definition of these
     important conformance terms.
 2.  It must be designed so that an IPP Printer can transparently
     support the IPP Notification semantics by using third-party
     notification services that exist today or that may be
     standardized in the future.
 3.  It must define a means for a Job-Submitting End User to specify
     zero or more Notification Recipients when submitting a print job.
     A Submitter will not be able to prevent out-of-band subscriptions
     from authorized persons, such as Operators.
 4.  It must define a means, when specifying a Notification Recipient,
     for a Notification Subscriber to specify one or more notification
     events for that Notification Recipient, subject to administrative
     and security policy restrictions.  Any of the following
     constitute Job or Printer Events for which a Job Submitting End
     User can specify that notifications be sent:
  1. Any standard Printer MIB alert
  2. Job Received (transition from Unknown to Pending)
  3. Job Started (transition from Pending to Processing)
  4. Page Complete (page is stacked)
  5. Collated Copy Complete (last sheet of collated copy is

stacked)

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 10] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

  1. Job Complete (transition from Processing or Processing-stopped

to Completed)

  1. Job Aborted (transition from Pending, Pending-held,
  2. Processing, or Processing-stopped to Aborted)
  3. Job Canceled (transition from Pending, Pending-held,
  4. Processing, or Processing-held to Canceled)
  5. Other job state changes, such as paused, purged
  6. Device problems for which the job is destined
  7. Job (interpreter) issues
 5.   It must define how an End User or Operator subscribes for
  1. any set of Job Events for a specific job, or
  2. any set of Printer Events while a specific job is not

complete.

 6.   It must define how an End User or Operator subscribes for the
      following without having to submit a Job:
  1. Any set of Printer Events for a defined period.
  2. Any set of Job Events for all jobs, with no control over

which jobs.

 7.   It must define how the Notification Subscriber is able to
      specify either immediate or store-and-forward notification
      independently for each Notification Recipient.  The means may be
      explicit, or implied by the method of delivery chosen by the Job
      Submitting End User.
 8.   It must define common delivery methods: e.g., email.
 9.   It must define how an IPP Printer validates its ability to
      deliver an Event by using the specified delivery scheme.  If it
      does not support the specified scheme, or if the specified
      scheme is invalid for some reason, then the IPP Printer accepts
      and performs the request anyway and indicates the unsupported
      attribute values.  There is no requirement for the IPP Printer
      receiving the print request to validate the identity of a
      Notification Recipient, or the ability of the system to deliver
      an event to that recipient as requested (for example, if the
      Notification Recipient is not at work today).
 10.  It must define a class of IPP event notification delivery
      methods that can flow through corporate firewalls.  However, an
      IPP printer need not test to guarantee delivery of the
      notification through a firewall before accepting a print job.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 11] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

 11.  It may define a means to deliver a notification to the
      submitting client when the delivery of an event notification to
      a specified Notification Recipient fails.  A fallback means of
      subscribers to determine whether notifications have failed
      (i.e., polling) may be provided.
 12.  It must define a mechanism for localizing Human-Consumable
      Notifications by the Notification Source.
 13.  It may define a way to specify whether event delivery requires
      acknowledgement back to the Notification Source.
 14.  There must be a mechanism defined so that job-independent
      subscriptions do not become stale and do not require human
      intervention to be removed.  However, a subscription must not be
      deemed stale only if it is unable to deliver an Event
      Notification, as temporary Notification delivery problems must
      be tolerated.
 15.  A mechanism must be defined so that an Event Subscriber is able
      to add an Event Subscription to a Job after the Job has been
      submitted.
 16.  A mechanism must be defined so that a client is able to cancel
      an Event Subscription on a job or printer after the job has been
      submitted.
 17.  A mechanism must be defined so that a client can obtain the set
      of current Subscriptions.

5. Security Considerations for IPP Notifications Requirements

 By far the biggest security concern is the abuse of notification:
 sending unwanted notifications sent to third parties (i.e., spam).
 The problem is made worse by notification addresses that may be
 redistributed to multiple parties (e.g., mailing lists).  Scenarios
 exist in which third-party notification is required (see scenarios 2
 and 3).  The fully secure solution would require active agreement of
 all recipients before anything is sent out.  However, requirement 9
 ("There is no requirement for an IPP Printer receiving the print
 request to validate the identity of an event recipient") argues
 against this.  Certain systems may decide to disallow third-party
 notifications (a traditional fax model).
 The same security issues are present when Clients submit notification
 requests to the IPP Printer as when they submit an IPP/1.1 print job
 request.  The same mechanisms used by IPP/1.1 can therefore be used

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 12] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

 by the client notification submission.  Operations that require
 authentication can use the HTTP authentication.  Operations that
 require privacy can use the HTTP/TLS privacy.
 The notification access control model should be similar to the IPP
 access control model.  Creating a notification subscription is
 associated with a user.  Only the creator or an operator can cancel
 the subscription.  The system may limit the listing of items to items
 owned by the user.  Some subscriptions (e.g., those that have a
 lifetime longer than a job) can be done only by privileged users
 (operators and/or administrators), if that is the authorization
 policy.
 The standard security concerns (delivery to the right user, privacy
 of content, tamper-proof content) apply to the notification delivery.
 IPP should use the security mechanism of the delivery method used.
 Some delivery mechanisms are more secure than others.  Therefore,
 sensitive notifications should use the delivery method that has the
 strongest security.

6. Internationalization Considerations

 The Human-Consumable Notification must be localized to the natural
 language and charset that Notification Subscriber specifies within
 the choice of natural languages and charsets that the IPP Printer
 supports.
 The Machine-Consumable Notification data uses the "application/ipp"
 MIME media type.  It contains attributes whose text values are
 required to be in the natural language and charset that the
 Notification Subscriber specifies within the choice of natural
 languages and charsets that the IPP Printer supports.  See [RFC2566].

7. IANA Considerations

 Some notification delivery methods have been registered with IANA for
 use in URLs.  These will be defined in other documents.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 13] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

8. References

8.1. Normative References

 [RFC2910]   Herriot, R., Butler, S., Moore, P., Turner, R., and J.
             Wenn, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Encoding and
             Transport", RFC 2910, September 2000.
 [RFC2911]   Hastings, T., Herriot, R., deBry, R., Isaacson, S., and
             P. Powell, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and
             Semantics", RFC 2911, September 2000.
 [RFC3995]   Herriot, R. and T. Hastings, "Internet Printing Protocol
             (IPP): Event Notifications and Subscriptions", RFC 3995,
             March 2005.

8.2. Informative References

 [RFC2565]   Herriot, R., Butler, S., Moore, P., and R. Turner,
             "Internet Printing Protocol/1.0: Encoding and Transport",
             RFC 2565, April 1999.
 [RFC2566]   deBry, R., Hastings, T., Herriot, R., Isaacson, S., and
             P. Powell, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.0: Model and
             Semantics", RFC 2566, April 1999.
 [RFC2567]   Wright, F., "Design Goals for an Internet Printing
             Protocol", RFC 2567, April 1999.
 [RFC2568]   Zilles, S., "Rationale for the Structure of the Model and
             Protocol for the Internet Printing Protocol", RFC 2568,
             April 1999.
 [RFC2569]   Herriot, R., Hastings, T., Jacobs, N., and J. Martin,
             "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols", RFC 2569, April
             1999.
 [RFC2639]   Hastings, T., Manros, C., Zehler, P., Kugler, C., and H.
             Holst, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Implementor's
             Guide", RFC 3196, November 2001.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 14] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

9. Appendix A: Description of the Base IPP Documents

 The base set of IPP documents includes the following:
    Design Goals for an Internet Printing Protocol [RFC2567]
    Rationale for the Structure and Model and Protocol for the
      Internet Printing Protocol [RFC2568]
    Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics [RFC2911]
    Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Encoding and Transport [RFC2910]
    Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Implementer's Guide [RFC3196]
    Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols [RFC2569]
 "Design Goals for an Internet Printing Protocol" takes a broad look
 at distributed printing functionality, and it enumerates real-life
 scenarios that help clarify the features that need to be included in
 a printing protocol for the Internet.  It identifies requirements for
 three types of users: end users, operators, and administrators.  It
 calls out a subset of end-user requirements that are satisfied in
 IPP/1.0 [RFC2566], [RFC2565].  A few OPTIONAL operator operations
 have been added to IPP/1.1 [RFC2911], [RFC2910].
 "Rationale for the Structure and Model and Protocol for the Internet
 Printing Protocol" describes IPP from a high-level view, defines a
 roadmap for the various documents that form the suite of IPP
 specification documents, and gives background and rationale for the
 IETF IPP working group's major decisions.
 "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics" describes a
 simplified model with abstract objects, their attributes, and their
 operations.  The model introduces a Printer and a Job.  The Job
 supports multiple documents per Job.  The model document also
 addresses security, internationalization, and directory issues.
 "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Encoding and Transport" is a formal
 mapping of the abstract operations and attributes defined in the
 model document onto HTTP/1.1 [RFC2616].  It also defines the encoding
 rules for a new Internet MIME media type called "application/ipp".
 This document also defines the rules for transporting over HTTP a
 message body whose Content-Type is "application/ipp".  This document
 defines the "ipp" scheme for identifying IPP printers and jobs.
 "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Implementer's Guide" gives insight
 and advice to implementers of IPP clients and IPP objects.  It is
 intended to help them understand IPP/1.1 and some of the
 considerations that may assist them in the design of their client
 and/or IPP object implementations.  For example, a typical order of
 processing requests is given, including error checking.  Motivation
 for some of the specification decisions is also included.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 15] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

 "Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols" gives some advice to
 implementers of gateways between IPP and LPD (Line Printer Daemon )
 implementations.

Authors' Addresses

 Tom Hastings (editor)
 Xerox Corporation
 701 S Aviation Blvd,  ESAE 242
 El Segundo, CA   90245
 Phone: 310-333-6413
 Fax:   310-333-6342
 EMail: hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com
 Roger deBry
 Utah Valley State College
 Phone: (801) 863-8848
 EMail: debryro@uvsc.edu
 Harry Lewis
 IBM Corporation
 6300 Diagonal Hwy
 Boulder, CO 80301
 Phone: (303) 924-5337
 EMail: harryl@us.ibm.com

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 16] RFC 3997 IPP: Notification Requirements March 2005

Full Copyright Statement

 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
 retain all their rights.
 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
 made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
 http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
 this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
 ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
 Internet Society.

Hastings, et al. Informational [Page 17]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc3997.txt · Last modified: 2005/03/22 01:31 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki