Subject: IPP2IFAX Proposed WG and Charter Bashing

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 15:30:34 -0600

During IETF Orlando I made a presentation to both the Internet Print Protocol
WG as well as the FAX WG on the issue of the using IPP as a Facsimile Service
based on a personal ID that I submitted. [draft-shockey-ipp2ifax-01.txt]

There was considerable discussion of this issue in the IPP WG and there was
general consensus that this was a area that could use some work.

Several individuals at both meetings indicated a desire to contribute.

It was the suggestion of the APP Area Director Keith Moore that this be set up
as a separate IETF WG to facilitate discussion between the IPP and FAX WG's on
this issue

On December 16 & 17 I presented the results of the IETF meetings to a group of
PWG/IPP members in San Diego.

The consensus at that meeting was that this concept has merit and should
proceed. Several individuals at that meeting offered to participate in the work
and the suggestion was put forward that I be proposed as the Chair of this new
WG/BOF should it be chartered.

Before I formally submit a request for a new WG to the AD's I'd like to bash
out a Charter.

The proposed charter below was discussed at the PWG/IPP meetings in San Diego.

Any comments, suggestions, flames etc would be appreciated.

##############

Internet Print Protocol and Internet Fax  (ipp2ifax)
------------------

Chair(s):   Richard Shockey  <[email-masked]>  [PROPOSED]

Applications Area Director(s):
Keith Moore             <[email-masked]>
        Patrik Fältström        <[email-masked]>

 Area Advisor
        Keith Moore  <[email-masked]>

 Mailing lists:
        General Discussion:     [email-masked]
        To Subscribe:           [email-masked]
                In Body:                subscribe ifx  [your-email-address]    
The subject line should be blank        

Archive:          
<http://www.pwg.org/hypermail/ifx>

Description of Working Group:

The Internet Print Protocol [IPP] has been developed within the IETF to
facilitate the remote printing of documents over the Internet. At a sufficient
level of abstraction FAX on the General Switched Telephone Network [GSTN] could
also be considered a remote printing or document transfer technology.

The purpose of the work group will be to investigate and document those
elements of IPP that qualify as a facsimile service. A goal of the WG will be
to note the legal as well as general custom and practice of GSTN FAX and apply
those principals to IPP transactions.

Current work within the IETF on FAX has centered on using Internet Mail
standards in a Store and Forward mode. Considerable evidence exists that there
is a need for protocols that more closely approximate the real-time and point
to point model of traditional GSTN FAX.

Traditional GSTN FAX is limited to the type and quality of output. IETF
Internet Fax standards are also limited to a specific set of MIME Content-Types
specified in RFC 2301.  IPP has no such restrictions on the quality of document
to be printed or displayed.

The WG will not propose any revisions to the current Internet Print Protocol
specifications but may use normal IPP Attribute Extensions and behavioral
practice requirements to facilitate interoperability with GSTN FAX and RFC2305
using elements of RFC2301 as needed.

The WG will not propose any revisions or extensions to IETF Internet Fax
standards [RFC2305] and its successors.

The group will take note of other areas within the IETF that may have direct
bearing on IPP and FAX interworking.

Relevant areas include:  

-       Security, Authentication and Encryption (SSL3 -TLS)
-       Sender Identification (vCard)

The working group will take note of quality of service issues.    

The working group will coordinate its activities with the Internet Print
Protocol working group [IPP] and the Internet Fax working group [FAX] as well
other facsimile-related standards bodies and related work groups, notably the
ITU-T Study Group 8.   

Goals and Milestones:  
  
March 1999 : Submit Internet Draft of Goals and Requirements for the use of the
Internet Print Protocol as a Facsimile Service

April 1999 : Submit Internet Draft for IPP Behavior as a Facsimile Service

May 1999 : Submit Internet Draft of IPP as a Gateway to SMTP and GSTN Facsimile
Services

Richard Shockey
Shockey Consulting LLC                  
8045 Big Bend Blvd. Suite 110    
St. Louis, MO 63119
Voice 314.918.9020
Fax   314.918.9015
INTERNET Mail & IFAX : [email-masked]  
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

---

From: Dan Wing <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:24:50 -0800 (PST)

> Internet Print Protocol and Internet Fax  (ipp2ifax)
[...]
> elements of IPP that qualify as a facsimile service. 

"... and extend IPP where necessary to more closely perform the functions
of facsimile."  [see below]

> A goal of the WG will be to note the legal as well as general custom
> and practice of GSTN FAX and apply those principals to IPP
> transactions.
> 
> Current work within the IETF on FAX

Clarify by changing to:

  "Current work within the IETF's Internet Fax Working Group ..."

> has centered on using Internet Mail standards in a Store and Forward
> mode. Considerable evidence exists that there is a need for protocols
> that more closely approximate the real-time and point to point model
> of traditional GSTN FAX.
> 
> Traditional GSTN FAX is limited to the type and quality of output.
> IETF Internet Fax standards are also limited to a specific set of MIME
> Content-Types specified in RFC 2301.  IPP has no such restrictions on
> the quality of document to be printed or displayed.
> 

I could see the IFX group proposing extensions or revisions to IPP,
actually -- for example a mechanism to indicate This Is a Fax and should
contain timestamps.  I wouldn't want such extensions to be out of scope.

> -       Sender Identification (vCard)

Conneg?

> The working group will take note of quality of service issues.    

On the Internet, "Quality of Service" has distinct meaning -- be careful
here.  QoS usually means bounded delay of packet delivery -- much
different from what you mean (which is likely bounded delay of the
physical output).

Perhaps something like: "The WG will attempt to provide mechanisms to
allow interoperable implementations to be created which closely emulate
the existing end-user- expected functionality of fax." but shorter-winded.

[...]

-Dan Wing

---

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 21:14:10 -0600

>> -       Sender Identification (vCard)

Excellent Point... at the regular IPP/PWG meeting in San Diego myself and
Randy Turner of Sharp noted the need for IPP to make contact with the
CONNEG WG and exchange ideas and concepts since IPP is pretty deep into
defining capabilities for IPP Printer Objects.

The CONNEG framework is IMHO perfect for printers...at the very least the
framework IPP is considering should not conflict with CONNEG, though 3WC
has several proposals on the table for similar concepts specifically in the
mobile device area using XML [suprise?].  

I'm very hopeful that the fine work of CONNEG can extend out into other
application areas.

Richard Shockey
Shockey Consulting LLC