[2039] in Enterprise Print Delivery Team
Re: Queue Name
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Theresa M Regan)
Tue Dec 11 06:06:03 2001
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20011211055352.022ced40@hesiod>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:09:57 -0500
To: David F Lambert <LAMBERT@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
From: Theresa M Regan <tregan@MIT.EDU>
Cc: "Huxley, Bil" <huxley@MIT.EDU>, "Lynne E. Durland" <durland@MIT.EDU>,
R3-Print@MIT.EDU,
Enterprise Printing Delivery Project Team <printdel@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <200112102331.SAA14247@fort-point-station.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Hi Dave,
You reference SAP's inability to use klpr. Since kerberized printing is
not a requirement in the administrative space, I am not sure why it is
being raised. As far as I can remember, it was decided that it was not a
requirement by several teams early on and we have never made a request of SAP.
Is it being raised because some of the queues on IPM are being set to
accept only kerberized print requests? Is there an expectation that IPM
queues will only accept kerberized print requests in the future?
When administrative users mention "security" with their printouts, they
request a printer isolated from general access. The most common comment is
that if they cannot get to the printer quickly and the documents are
"confidential", then, they fine comfort limiting who can pick-up documents
from that printer. I have never heard concerns (within the administrative
community) about the data stream to the printer.
Today, for DLCs, with the exception of the DTRs and Summary statements,
most SAP R/3 transactions are completed via the web. If/when print
requests are needed, they are completed via "desktop" printing solutions
and in most cases, klpr is not involved. The trend for SAP R/3
functionality is to continue with web browser solutions; thereby, bypassing
the print queue approach in most cases (not all).
With regard to the Queue Names, I was not able to attend R3-admin
yesterday; so, I still need to follow-up on that detail.
Thanks,
Theresa
At 06:20 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, David F Lambert wrote:
>Hi Bil,
>
>Actually we may want to eliminate EP1 altogether at some point. Our
>primary goal initially for EP1 was to move it as transparently as possible
>from CAO's perspective. Since we can handle PS output on the IP60 printers,
>we could just point output there with new or existing logical destination/
>queue names. I think it makes sense to minimize and/or eliminate
>different queues which basically do the same thing (forms, handling, etc.)
>
>Some duplication is required now due to accommodating SAP's inability
>to use klpr. So, at some point you can expect EP1's name to change or
>be replaced with a queue which performs similarly.
>
>Hope that helps...
>
>-Dave
>
>On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:04:35 -0500 Bil said:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Doesn't this imply that you would want to rename EP1 too?
> >
> >Confused,
> > Bil
> >
> >At 12/10/2001 01:47 PM -0500, Lynne E. Durland wrote:
> >>Greetings,
> >>
> >>Dave Lambert and Theresa met briefly last week to discuss the name
> >>EP60/EP62 for the new general queue for SAP central printing. Dave
> >>expressed concern that EP60 was not as descriptive as it might
> >>be. Theresa agreed to entertain other proposed names. In our printdel
> >>this morning we came up with DC1 and DC12 for the names. The DC standing
> >>for Data Center. Our current goal is to get this new queue implemented by
> >>Friday.
> >>
> >>Please let un know if the proposed new name is acceptable.
> >>
> >>Thanks
> >>
> >>Lynne
> >>Lynne E. Durland
> >>Information Systems
> >>Database Services
> >>W91-109
> >>O: 617-258-5857
> >>C: 617-293-8091
> >>H: KB1FEM
> >>
> >>"When one door of happiness closes, another opens; but often we look so
> >>long at the closed door that we do not see the one which has been opened
> >>for us."
> >>
> >> --Helen Keller
> >
> >
