Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa00285; 17 Jul 97 0:35 EDT Received: from tpoint.net (challenger.tpoint.net [204.29.207.17]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid AAA10555; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 00:34:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tpoint.net by tpoint.net with SMTP (8.8.2/25-eef) id EAA05590; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 04:29:34 GMT From: moneynow@19813.com Received: from mailhost.future.com [alt1.future.com [207.8.66.49] by future.com (8.8.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id GAA06266 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 1997 19:00:51 -0600 (EST) Date: Wed, 16 Jul 97 19:00:51 EST To: handpicked@yourturn.com Subject: IT'S YOUR TURN! $50,000 in 90 Days, Guaranteed!!! Message-ID: <188602760034FBB07049@future.com> Reply-To: itworks@future.com X-UIDL: 2510341046a56aeb2b228fda361c5a4e Comments: Authenticated sender is For those of us who HATE selling and who don't know a down line from a clothes line ..... You are about to make at least $50,000 - In less than 90 days. Read the enclosed program....THEN READ IT AGAIN!.... Please don't make the same mistake I made! I THREW this letter away at least twice before I took the time to read it. When I did, it dawned on me that this could work! Take a look for yourself! A copy of the letter I received is below. John My name is Christopher Erickson. Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends, and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. I truly believe it was wrong for me to be in debt like this. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share my experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER....FINANCIALLY!!! In mid-December, I received this program via email. Six months prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they worked or not. One claimed I'd make a million dollars in one year...it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it. But like I was saying, in December of '92 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY-MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further in debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. After determining that the program is LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT". Initially I sent out 10,000 emails. It only cost me about $15.00 for my time on-line. The great thing about email is that I didn't need any money for printing to send out the program, only the cost to fulfill my orders. I am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me!. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13th, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. When you read the GUARANTEE in the program, you will see that "YOU MUST RECEIVE 15 TO 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 20 to 90 days was done. By January 30th, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. If you go back to the GUARANTEE, "YOU MUST RECEIVE 100 OR MORE ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 19th, of my emailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it wont work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It doesn't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! REPORT #2 explains this. Always follow the guarantee, 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1, and 100 or more orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 20 to 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS !!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I'm sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and you are in financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! Sincerely, Christopher Erickson PS Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! "THREW IT AWAY" "I had received this program before. I threw it away, but later wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get a copy, so I had to wait until I was emailed another copy of the program. Eleven months passed, then it came. I DIDN'T throw this one away. I made $41,000 on the first try." Dawn W., Evansville, IN "NO FREE LUNCH" "My late father always told me, 'remember, Alan, there is no free lunch in life. You get out of life what you put into it.' Through trial and error and a somewhat slow frustrating start, I finally figured it out. The program works very well, I just had to find the right target group of people to email it to. So far this year, I have made over $63,000 using this program. I know my dad would have been very proud of me." Alan B., Philadelphia, PA A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM By the time you have read the enclosed information and looked over the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for ten years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate...because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of your money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have several offices which market this and several other programs here in the US and overseas. By the Spring, we wish to market the 'Internet' by a partnership with AMERICA ON LINE. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to email a copy of this exciting program to everyone that you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on every one of them!. Remember though, the more you send out, the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW! "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! Definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$$ Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume you and all those involved send out 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a .5% response. Using a good list the response could be much better. Also many people will send out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those .5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The .5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The .5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 five dollar bills for you. CASH!!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING... AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF ONLY 2,000. Believe me, many people will do that and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practically nothing. You obviously already have an internet connection and email is FREE!!! REPORT#3 will show you the best methods for bulk emailing and purchasing email lists. THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come in contact with people, do any hard work, and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dream will come true. This multi-level email order marketing program works perfectly...100% EVERY TIME. Email is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non-commercialized method of advertising NOW!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using email. Get your piece of this action!! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford Research and The Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold throughout Multi-level Methods by the mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the US, 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. INSTRUCTIONS We at Erris Mail Order Marketing Business, have a method of raising capital that REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use $50,000 to $125,000 in the next 20 to 90 days. Before you say "Bull", please read the program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what we do: As with all multi-level business, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi- level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME AND ARE FILLED THROUGH THE MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-level Mail Order Marketing anywhere! Step (1) Order all four 4 REPORTS listed by NAME AND NUMBER. Do this by ordering the REPORT from each of the four 4 names listed on the next page. For each REPORT, send $5 CASH and a SELF- ADDRESSED, STAMPED envelope (BUSINESS SIZE #10) to the person listed for the SPECIFIC REPORT. International orders should also include $1 extra for postage. It is essential that you specify the NAME and NUMBER of the report requested to the person you are ordering from. You will need ALL FOUR 4 REPORTS because you will be REPRINTING and RESELLING them. DO NOT alter the names or sequence other than what the instructions say. IMPORTANT: Always provide same-day service on all orders. Step (2) Replace the name and address under REPORT #1 with yours, moving the one that was there down to REPORT #2. Drop the name and address under REPORT #2 to REPORT #3, moving the one that was there to REPORT #4. The name and address that was under REPORT #4 is dropped from the list and this party is no doubt on the way to the bank. When doing this, make certain you type the names and addresses ACCURATELY! DO NOT MIX UP MOVING PRODUCT/REPORT POSITIONS!!! Step (3) Having made the required changes in the NAME list, save it as a text (.txt) file in it's own directory to be used with whatever email program you like. Again, REPORT #3 will tell you the best methods of bulk emailing and acquiring email lists. Step (4) Email a copy of the entire program (all of this is very important) to everyone whose address you can get your hands on. Start with friends and relatives since you can encourage them to take advantage of this fabulous money-making opportunity. That's what I did. And they love me now, more than ever. Then, email to anyone and everyone! Use your imagination! You can get email addresses from companies on the internet who specialize in email mailing lists. These are very cheap, 100,000 addresses for around $35.00. IMPORTANT: You won't get a good response if you use an old list, so always request a FRESH, NEW list. You will find out where to purchase these lists when you order the four 4 REPORTS. ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS!!! REQUIRED REPORTS ***Order each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME*** ALWAYS SEND A SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE AND $5 CASH FOR EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME AND NUMBER ____________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: BC Enterprises 2899 Agoura Rd, #299 Westlake Village, CA 91361 ____________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: LDR Enterprises 204 High Ridge Dr Belleville, IL 62223 ____________________________________________________ REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: C & A Enterprises 1003 W Main #1B Vienna, IL 62995 ____________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Hill Enterprises 7060 W. Sheridan Rd. Suite 311 Chicago, IL ____________________________________________________ CONCLUSION I am enjoying my fortune that I made by sending out this program. You too, will be making money in 20 to 90 days, if you follow the SIMPLE STEPS outlined in this mailing. To be financially independent is to be FREE. Free to make financial decisions as never before. Go into business, get into investments, retire or take a vacation. No longer will a lack of money hold you back. However, very few people reach financial independence, because when opportunity knocks, they choose to ignore it. It is much easier to say "NO" than "YES", and this is the question that you must answer. Will YOU ignore this amazing opportunity or will you take advantage of it? If you do nothing, you have indeed missed something and nothing will change. Please re-read this material, this is a special opportunity. If you have any questions, please feel free to write to the sender of this information. You will get a prompt and informative reply. My method is simple. I sell thousands of people a product for $5 that costs me pennies to produce and email. I should also point out that this program is legal and everyone who participates WILL make money. This is not a chain letter or pyramid scam. At times you have probably received chain letters, asking you to send money, on faith, but getting NOTHING in return, NO product what-so-ever! Not only are chain letters illegal, but the risk of someone breaking the chain makes them quite unattractive. You are offering a legitimate product to your people. After they purchase the product from you, they reproduce more and resell them. It's simple free enterprise. As you learned from the enclosed material, the PRODUCT is a series of four 4 FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS REPORTS. The information contained in these REPORTS will not only help you in making your participation in this program more rewarding, but will be useful to you in any other business decisions you make in the years ahead. You are also buying the rights to reprint all of the REPORTS, which will be ordered from you by those to whom you mail this program. The concise one and two page REPORTS you will be buying can easily be reproduced at a local copy center for a cost off about 3 cents a copy. Best wishes with the program and Good Luck! "IT WAS TRULY AMAZING" "Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this program. But conservative as I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was no way that I could not get enough orders to at least get my money back. BOY, was I ever surprised when I found my medium sized post office box crammed with orders! I will make more money this year than any ten years of my life before." Mary Riceland, Lansing, MI TIPS FOR SUCCESS Send for your four 4 REPORTS immediately so you will have them when the orders start coming in. When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the product/service to comply with US Postal and Lottery laws. Title 18 Sections 1302 and 1341 specifically state that: "A PRODUCT OR SERVICE MUST BE EXCHANGED FOR MONEY RECEIVED." WHILE YOU WAIT FOR THE REPORTS TO ARRIVE: 1. Name your new company. You can use your own name if you desire. 2. Get a post office box (preferred). 3. Edit the names and addresses on the program. You must remember, your name and address go next to REPORT #1 and the others all move down one, with the fourth one being bumped OFF the list. 4. Obtain as many email addresses as possible to send until you receive the information on mailing list companies in REPORT #3. 5. Decide on the number of programs you intend to send out. The more you send, and the quicker you send them, the more money you will make. 6. After mailing the programs, get ready to fill the orders. 7. Copy the four 4 REPORTS so you are able to sent them out as soon as you receive an order. IMPORTANT: ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ORDERS YOU RECEIVE! 8. Make certain the letter and reports are neat and legible. YOUR GUARANTEE The check point which GUARANTEES your success is simply this: you must receive 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1. This is a must!!! If you don't within two weeks, email out more programs until you do. Then a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2, if you don't, send out more programs until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, (take a deep breath) you can sit back and relax, because YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE AT LEAST $50,000. Mathematically it is a proven guarantee. Of those who have participated in the program and reached the above GUARANTEES-ALL have reached their $50,000 goal. Also, remember, every time your name is moved down the list you are in front of a different REPORT, so you can keep track of your program by knowing what people are ordering from you. IT'S THAT EASY, REALLY, IT IS!!! REMEMBER: "HE WHO DARES NOTHING, NEED NOT HOPE FOR ANYTHING." "INVEST A LITTLE TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY NOW OR SEARCH FOR IT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE."   Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa21126; 17 Jul 97 20:40 EDT Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid UAA14174 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 20:38:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA28139 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 20:35:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 17 Jul 1997 20:23:36 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA26475 for ipp-outgoing; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 20:05:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <41135C785691CF11B73B00805FD4D2D7030F7954@RED-17-MSG.dns.microsoft.com> From: Paul Moore To: "'rturner@sharplabs.com'" Cc: 'JK Martin' , ipp@pwg.org Subject: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 17:05:22 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Sender: ipp-owner@pwg.org Not the issue. I do not object to using URI as job identifiers - I object to not giving the job identifier in a job specifc request. To restate - when I do a canceljob operation I do not supply a job identifier - the target job is implicit in the transport endpoint - this ties us to a transport. > -----Original Message----- > From: Randy Turner [SMTP:rturner@sharplabs.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 1997 5:05 PM > To: Paul Moore > Cc: 'JK Martin'; ipp@pwg.org > Subject: Re: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests > > Paul Moore wrote: > > > I mean that not using jobids at all (which is what we do at present) > > ties us to HTTP. > > In the model document, job identifiers are URLs. If we have pushed > URLs > out of themain body of the protocol up into the transport layer, then > this is a mistake. Job identifiers > belong within the application/ipp body, and, according to the model > document, object > identifiers are in URL format. Also, the use of URL/URI strings as > object identifiers in > and of itself does not tie us to any one transport mechanism. > > Randy > > > > > > > > In the current model a cancel job is done by posting a cancel > > operation > > to the job URL. No job id is sent, it is implied in the transport > > endpoint. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: JK Martin [SMTP:jkm@underscore.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 1997 1:45 PM > > > To: Paul Moore > > > Cc: ipp@pwg.org > > > Subject: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests > > > > > > > also using URLs to imply the job id means that we are tied to a > > > specific > > > > transport - something we tried to avoid. If we were to use , > say, > > > raw IP > > > > then you would need to assign an IP port to each job or > something > > > like > > > > that. > > > > > > > > > Is this really true? Do you mean we would be tying ourselves to > > HTTP > > > by using a URL as a job ID? > > > > > > It would seem that just because we choose the use the syntax and > > > semantics of a URL doesn't mean we necessarily tie ourselves to > > HTTP, > > > right? > > > > > > ...jay > >   Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa21707; 17 Jul 97 21:25 EDT Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid VAA14244 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:23:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA00382 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:20:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:13:36 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA29753 for ipp-outgoing; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:05:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970717175648.009a0100@garfield> X-Sender: cmanros@garfield X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 17:56:48 PDT To: Paul Moore , "'rturner@sharplabs.com'" From: Carl-Uno Manros Subject: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests Cc: 'JK Martin' , ipp@pwg.org In-Reply-To: <41135C785691CF11B73B00805FD4D2D7030F7954@RED-17-MSG.dns.mi crosoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: ipp-owner@pwg.org At 05:05 PM 7/17/97 PDT, Paul Moore wrote: >Not the issue. I do not object to using URI as job identifiers - I >object to not giving the job identifier in a job specifc request. > >To restate - when I do a canceljob operation I do not supply a job >identifier - the target job is implicit in the transport endpoint - this >ties us to a transport. > Paul, it seems that a lot of this discussion has been people talking past each other, including myself. I fully support your proposal as stated above. On the more general issue that seems to have started up this whole thread of discussion, namely whether a server should be able to suppress certain attributes due to security restrictions, we seem to mix up general model issues with security issues. My take on that problem is the following: 1) Either the Printer is open (non-secure), in which case the server should return all the information. 2) Or the Printer is limiting access through some security restrictions, usually requiring authentication and authorization. In this case, a) the client is either accepted and gets all the information, b) or it does not pass the security check and does not get anything. In consequence, I suggest that there is no half-way house cases where the server would return some, but not all of the information and we should amend the model document to reflect this. Carl-Uno Carl-Uno Manros Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation 701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231 Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514 Email: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com   Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa21801; 17 Jul 97 21:31 EDT Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid VAA14259 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:29:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA00903 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:26:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:22:55 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA29828 for ipp-outgoing; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:12:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 18:11:41 -0700 From: Robert Herriot Message-Id: <199707180111.SAA05525@woden.eng.sun.com> To: paulmo@microsoft.com, rturner@sharplabs.com Subject: Re: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests Cc: jkm@underscore.com, ipp@pwg.org X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: ipp-owner@pwg.org I think that we are finally getting to the heart of this issue, namely that the protocol currently puts the URI of the operation's target object in the Request-Line of the HTTP operation, and it is not in the application/ipp message body. I think that I am hearing both Randy and Paul say that they think that the target job or printer URI should be a parameter in the application/ipp message body. Am I right in my understanding? Bob Herriot > From rturner@sharplabs.com Thu Jul 17 17:35:23 1997 > > Paul Moore wrote: > > > Not the issue. I do not object to using URI as job identifiers - I > > object to not giving the job identifier in a job specifc request. > > > > To restate - when I do a canceljob operation I do not supply a job > > identifier - the target job is implicit in the transport endpoint - > > this > > ties us to a transport. > > Ok, I think we're in violent agreement here....I agree that the > operandsof an IPP operation should not be implied by any transport-level > information; > especially if we plan on moving IPP to other transports... > > Randy > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Randy Turner [SMTP:rturner@sharplabs.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 1997 5:05 PM > > > To: Paul Moore > > > Cc: 'JK Martin'; ipp@pwg.org > > > Subject: Re: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests > > > > > > Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > > > I mean that not using jobids at all (which is what we do at > > present) > > > > ties us to HTTP. > > > > > > In the model document, job identifiers are URLs. If we have pushed > > > URLs > > > out of themain body of the protocol up into the transport layer, > > then > > > this is a mistake. Job identifiers > > > belong within the application/ipp body, and, according to the model > > > document, object > > > identifiers are in URL format. Also, the use of URL/URI strings as > > > object identifiers in > > > and of itself does not tie us to any one transport mechanism. > > > > > > Randy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the current model a cancel job is done by posting a cancel > > > > operation > > > > to the job URL. No job id is sent, it is implied in the transport > > > > endpoint. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: JK Martin [SMTP:jkm@underscore.com] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 1997 1:45 PM > > > > > To: Paul Moore > > > > > Cc: ipp@pwg.org > > > > > Subject: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests > > > > > > > > > > > also using URLs to imply the job id means that we are tied to > > a > > > > > specific > > > > > > transport - something we tried to avoid. If we were to use , > > > say, > > > > > raw IP > > > > > > then you would need to assign an IP port to each job or > > > something > > > > > like > > > > > > that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this really true? Do you mean we would be tying ourselves to > > > > > > HTTP > > > > > by using a URL as a job ID? > > > > > > > > > > It would seem that just because we choose the use the syntax and > > > > > > > semantics of a URL doesn't mean we necessarily tie ourselves to > > > > HTTP, > > > > > right? > > > > > > > > > > ...jay > > > > > > > > > >   Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa22025; 17 Jul 97 21:52 EDT Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid VAA14276 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:51:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA01535 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:47:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:44:13 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA01044 for ipp-outgoing; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 21:37:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 18:33:41 -0700 From: Robert Herriot Message-Id: <199707180133.SAA05546@woden.eng.sun.com> To: paulmo@microsoft.com, rturner@sharplabs.com, cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com Subject: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests Cc: jkm@underscore.com, ipp@pwg.org X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: ipp-owner@pwg.org > From cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com Thu Jul 17 18:17:07 1997 > > 1) Either the Printer is open (non-secure), in which case the server > should return all the information. > > 2) Or the Printer is limiting access through some security restrictions, > usually requiring authentication and authorization. In this case, > > a) the client is either accepted and gets all the information, > b) or it does not pass the security check and does not get anything. > > In consequence, I suggest that there is no half-way house cases where the > server would return some, but not all of the information and we should > amend the model document to reflect this. > I disagree, a secure printer could reveal some but not all information about a job. We have left the degree of information purposely vague so that a Printer can return as little or as much information as it wants based on who is asking. What Paul proposed was that a Printer could not refuse to return a job-uri with Get-Jobs, though it could return a special job-uri that was different from what the job owner might get. Bob Herriot   Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa11380; 18 Jul 97 14:11 EDT Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid OAA16381 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 14:10:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA14447 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 14:06:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 18 Jul 1997 14:01:38 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA14198 for pmp-outgoing; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 13:58:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 10:57:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Ron Bergman To: Lloyd Young , Randy Turner cc: pmp@pwg.org Subject: PMP> Output Measurement Diagram Message-ID: X-X-Sender: rbergma@it.dpc.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: pmp-owner@pwg.org Randy, The diagram on page 96 of the latest (from the rfc drafts at ds.internic.net) Printer Mib draft has a formatting error. The vertical bar (|) and word "direction" should be on the previous line. (See RFC 1759 for the correct representation.) Ron Bergman Dataproducts Corp.   Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa14233; 18 Jul 97 16:35 EDT Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid QAA16935 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 16:34:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA18991 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 16:30:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 18 Jul 1997 16:21:03 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA18111 for ipp-outgoing; Fri, 18 Jul 1997 16:09:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 13:08:35 -0700 From: Robert Herriot Message-Id: <199707182008.NAA06316@woden.eng.sun.com> To: ipp@pwg.org, rturner@sharplabs.com Subject: Re: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: ipp-owner@pwg.org So, I think that we are in agreement that the model and protocol documents should state that the operations whose target is a Printer shall include a parameter called printer-uri and operations whose target is a job shall include a parameter called job-uri. Randy suggests that the value of job-uri/printer-uri could differ from the request-uri on the HTTP Request-Line, but the model has no such concept. So unless there are strong arguments to the contrary, the protocol document will state that the request-uri has the same value as the printer-uri/job-uri in the operation. Bob Herriot > From rturner@sharplabs.com Fri Jul 18 01:40:49 1997 > > Robert Herriot wrote: > > > I think that we are finally getting to the heart of this issue, namely > > > > that the protocol currently puts the URI of the operation's target > > object > > in the Request-Line of the HTTP operation, and it is not in the > > application/ipp message body. > > > > I think that I am hearing both Randy and Paul say that they think that > > > > the target job or printer URI should be a parameter in the > > application/ipp > > message body. Am I right in my understanding? > > Yes, this is basically the idea I was agreeing with. > > > > > > > Bob Herriot > > > > > From rturner@sharplabs.com Thu Jul 17 17:35:23 1997 > > > > > > Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > > > Not the issue. I do not object to using URI as job identifiers - I > > > > > > object to not giving the job identifier in a job specifc request. > > > > > > > > To restate - when I do a canceljob operation I do not supply a job > > > > > > identifier - the target job is implicit in the transport endpoint > > - > > > > this > > > > ties us to a transport. > > > > > > Ok, I think we're in violent agreement here....I agree that the > > > operandsof an IPP operation should not be implied by any > > transport-level > > > information; > > > especially if we plan on moving IPP to other transports... > > > > > > Randy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Randy Turner [SMTP:rturner@sharplabs.com] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 1997 5:05 PM > > > > > To: Paul Moore > > > > > Cc: 'JK Martin'; ipp@pwg.org > > > > > Subject: Re: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests > > > > > > > > > > Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I mean that not using jobids at all (which is what we do at > > > > present) > > > > > > ties us to HTTP. > > > > > > > > > > In the model document, job identifiers are URLs. If we have > > pushed > > > > > URLs > > > > > out of themain body of the protocol up into the transport layer, > > > > > > then > > > > > this is a mistake. Job identifiers > > > > > belong within the application/ipp body, and, according to the > > model > > > > > document, object > > > > > identifiers are in URL format. Also, the use of URL/URI strings > > as > > > > > object identifiers in > > > > > and of itself does not tie us to any one transport mechanism. > > > > > > > > > > Randy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the current model a cancel job is done by posting a cancel > > > > > > operation > > > > > > to the job URL. No job id is sent, it is implied in the > > transport > > > > > > endpoint. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: JK Martin [SMTP:jkm@underscore.com] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 1997 1:45 PM > > > > > > > To: Paul Moore > > > > > > > Cc: ipp@pwg.org > > > > > > > Subject: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also using URLs to imply the job id means that we are tied > > to > > > > a > > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > transport - something we tried to avoid. If we were to use > > , > > > > > say, > > > > > > > raw IP > > > > > > > > then you would need to assign an IP port to each job or > > > > > something > > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this really true? Do you mean we would be tying > > ourselves to > > > > > > > > > > HTTP > > > > > > > by using a URL as a job ID? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It would seem that just because we choose the use the syntax > > and > > > > > > > > > > > semantics of a URL doesn't mean we necessarily tie ourselves > > to > > > > > > HTTP, > > > > > > > right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...jay > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa22162; 21 Jul 97 17:27 EDT Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-2.mv.com [199.125.85.31]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid RAA21658 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 17:26:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA10197 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 12:58:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Mon, 21 Jul 1997 12:56:50 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA10042 for pmp-outgoing; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 12:55:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 09:54:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Ron Bergman To: Randy Turner , Lloyd Young , pmp@pwg.org Subject: PMP> Editorial Comments on Latest Draft Message-ID: X-X-Sender: rbergma@it.dpc.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: pmp-owner@pwg.org Randy, Try as I might, I could not find anything serious in the latest document. I did find the following nits: 1. The numbered entries (2) on page 28 do not have a space between the period and the first character of the text. 2. The format of the "On-Line" entry on page 37 has the spacing from the left margin different from the other entries. 3. The Input Measurement Diagram has the same problem as I reported with the Output Measurement Diagram. (I am sure that you are aware of this, but just in case.) 4. The definitions in appendix A should begin with a capital letter and end with a period. Example: "Alert - a reportable ...... entry in the alert table" should be: "Alert - A reportable ...... entry in the alert table." All except #3 are really nits, but should be very easy to fix. Ron Bergman Dataproducts Corp.   Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa10396; 30 Jul 97 9:47 EDT Received: from ietf.ietf.org by ietf.org id aa07160; 30 Jul 97 9:36 EDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce@ietf.org cc: urn-ietf@bunyip.com Sender:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-urn-req-frame-03.txt Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 09:36:49 -0400 X-Orig-Sender: cclark@ietf.org Message-ID: <9707300936.aa07160@ietf.org> --NextPart A Revised Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Uniform Resource Names Working Group of the IETF. Title : Architectural Principles of Uniform Resource Name Resolution Author(s) : K. Sollins Filename : draft-ietf-urn-req-frame-03.txt Pages : 18 Date : 07/29/1997 This document addresses the issues of the discovery of URN (Uniform Resource Name) resolver services that in turn will directly translate URNs into URLs (Uniform Resource Locators) and URCs (Uniform Resource Characteristics). The document falls into three major parts, the assumptions underlying the work, the guidelines in order to be a viable Resolver Discovery Service or RDS, and a framework for designing RDSs. The guidelines fall into three principle areas: evolvability, usability, and security and privacy. An RDS that is compliant with the framework will not necessarily be compliant with the guidelines. Compliance with the guidelines will need to be validated separately. Internet-Drafts are available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-urn-req-frame-03.txt". A URL for the Internet-Draft is: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-urn-req-frame-03.txt Internet-Drafts directories are located at: o Africa: ftp.is.co.za o Europe: ftp.nordu.net ftp.nis.garr.it o Pacific Rim: munnari.oz.au o US East Coast: ds.internic.net o US West Coast: ftp.isi.edu Internet-Drafts are also available by mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ds.internic.net. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-urn-req-frame-03.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ds.internic.net can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e., documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ds.internic.net" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19970729143448.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-urn-req-frame-03.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-urn-req-frame-03.txt"; site="ds.internic.net"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <19970729143448.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart--