IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme

Robert Herriot <robert.herriot@Eng.Sun.COM> Tue, 14 July 1998 21:05 UTC

Delivery-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:05:20 -0400
Return-Path: ipp-owner@pwg.org
Received: from cnri.reston.va.us (ns [132.151.1.1]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id RAA16022 for <ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:05:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-1.mv.com [199.125.85.30]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id RAA11497 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:05:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA03449 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:05:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:00:03 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA02878 for ipp-outgoing; Tue, 14 Jul 1998 16:56:01 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199807142050.NAA21208@woden.eng.sun.com>
X-Sender: rherriot@woden.eng.sun.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 13:56:36 -0700
To: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, Robert Herriot <robert.herriot@Eng.Sun.COM>
From: Robert Herriot <robert.herriot@Eng.Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme
Cc: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, don@lexmark.com, Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>, Ipp@pwg.org, moore@cs.utk.edu
In-Reply-To: <199807142001.QAA10950@spot.cs.utk.edu>
References: <Your message of "Tue, 14 Jul 1998 12:46:29 PDT." <199807141940.MAA21099@woden.eng.sun.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; types="text/plain,text/html"; boundary="=====================_670366005==_.ALT"
Sender: owner-ipp@pwg.org

If there is one URL scheme for a fax telephone number and another for a voice
telephone number.  What scheme do I use for a telephone number that handles
both fax and voice?  Is there a third scheme that means "voice or fax"?

Bob Herriot


At 01:01 PM 7/14/98 , Keith Moore wrote:
>> If there is going to be a separate "E.164" URL type for voice and fax, how 
>> does mechanism work for phone numbers that are both voice and fax -- many 
>> homes have a system that takes voice messages and faxes.  
>
>There is not going to be a separate E.164 URL type.  It was eventually
>clear to (nearly) everyone that this was the wrong way to go.
>
>Voice and fax on the same E.164 number are really no different than
>multiple services served by the same IP address.  In either case,
>we use a different URL scheme name for each service.
>
>Keith
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email