The May PWG meeting was held in Crystal City, VA during the 3rd week of May. A summary of the status and activities of various PWG subgroups was presented, Wednesday morning, and is reported below.
Next meeting...
July 6
Monterey, CA
Price: $169 (room) + Meeting expenses
Deadline: June 12, 1998
For reservations call 703-413-5500. Ask for the "PWG" rate or "Lexmark"
Harry Lewis officially replaces Jay Martin as PWG secretary. Question about possibility of moving Domain name to another owner. New process document presented and reviewed. Minor changes will be included in update.
No news from the IETF
No news from the IETF. Focus is on notifications in conjunction with IPP.
Nearly complete. Final clarifications. Need formalization to become Internet Draft. Two more meetings anticipated.
Locked in on SBP2 protocol for low end of the stack. Working transport command set allowing to move packets without blocking, config ROM descriptions, rules, process about how device will operate. Profile document anticipated by Toronto. Desire to overlap with SDP. First implementations will use the current LPT redirector model but will migrate to sockets via 1394 in the future.
Unit directory - structure of config ROM with memory map - unit directories. Map services to "Logical Units" within this directory. Not the same as TIPSI LU's.
SENSE is watching the WEB DAV event developments. Events is now on the radar, everywhere. But where does the printer industry want to go? See www.blip.com. What about the role of JAVA?
First meeting under new Chair - Sandra Matt's HP Boise. Need OS buy-in. Inviting
Microsoft to Monterey meeting.
IPP 1.0 documents submitted to the IETF in January. Still waiting for word from Keith Moore - area Director. Comments - complex - can't get through the document. Yet he rejects efforts from the PWG to assist him in understanding the documents. Also, there have been complaints about the process. Meanwhile clarifications, notifications, testing etc. continue. There is a fairly stable proposal for an extension to allow Printer MIB access via IPP. This proposal, in some ways, overlaps with the SDP requirements.
The first full week of interoperability testing fleshed out some firewall issues and bugs in various prototypes, but was useful. We need to gather more interoperability momentum.
No news about the possibility of taking IPP to ECMA.
This group has formed to focus on SDP requirements. A charter has been posted. Several proposals are currently on the table including extending and/or mapping IPP to various sockets based transports, using TIPSI and a hybrid approach that uses the TIPSI packet as a basis but totally preserves the IPP encoding.
No report.
No report.