Bug 78269 - add printer wizard scan doesn't detect ipp queue name correctly
Summary: add printer wizard scan doesn't detect ipp queue name correctly
Status: RESOLVED UNMAINTAINED
Alias: None
Product: kcontrol
Classification: Miscellaneous
Component: kcmprintmgr (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: RedHat Enterprise Linux Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: KDEPrint Devel Mailinglist
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-03-23 01:20 UTC by Adam Wiggins
Modified: 2014-08-17 07:50 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Adam Wiggins 2004-03-23 01:20:00 UTC
Version:            (using KDE KDE 3.2.0)
Installed from:    RedHat RPMs
OS:          Linux

There are several IPP queues on my local network.  The "Scan" button in the wizard is great! - just one problem.  It seems to default the queue name to "ipp".  This causes the printer to set up but not work properly.  The actualy queue name is lp1, I had to change it manually to get it to work.

Here's a screenshot:

http://dusk.org/~adam/bugzilla/printer-wizard.png
Comment 1 Michael Goffioul 2004-03-26 08:55:26 UTC
It's important to make the difference between:
1) a network printer using the IPP protocol (beside usual ones like TCP)
2) a print queue installed on a remote CUPS/IPP server

In the first case, your local server communicates directly with the printer using the IPP protocol, and the printer URI is usually something like http://<printer_IP>:631/ipp (but I don't if this is standard, or if it works with all IPP printers).
In the second case, your local server communicates with a remote server (and not with the printer directly), and printer URI is then like http://<server_IP>:631/printers/<queue_name>.

The screenshot you mentionned only corresponds to type 1), and you cannot installed a queue of type 2) with it (in that case, you should use a queue type of "Remote CUPS server (IPP/HTTP)").

If you think that you are in case 1), then have you an idea of what should be the printer URI, so that IPP communication succeeds? (maybe referring to the printer documentation) What is the printer model/manufacturer?
Comment 2 Adam Wiggins 2004-03-26 10:13:28 UTC
I'm 95% sure that it is item #1.  The print server is one of those
little hardware boxes (I can get model information if that would be
helpful), and it servers IPP/HTTP.  I chose that in the wizard, and
then I clicked scan.  I was delighted to see that it located the
print server's IP address, but then when I clicked on it in the
selection box I got the client-error-not-found message visible in
the screenshot.

Our network admin had me delete the characters "ipp" from the Printer
URI box, and add "lp1" (the queue name).  That solved it, but it seems
to me that the network scan detecting the print server and then
getting the URI wrong is actually worse than not detecting it at all.
If this kind of print server is not supported or there is no way to
autodetect the queue name, it seems like it should prompt you to enter
a queue name, or at the very least just say "Sorry, I can't detect
the queue name - you must manually enter the URI."  The message shown
would lead you to believe that there is something wrong with the print
server access configuration, or something.

Comment 3 Michael Goffioul 2004-03-26 10:26:10 UTC
Could you give me some hardware information about that printer?
Comment 4 Adam Wiggins 2004-03-26 21:23:10 UTC
Print server is a Hawking H-PS1U:

http://www.hawkingtech.com/prodSpec.php?ProdID=132

It is connected to an HP Laserjet 1300.

Again, it works beautifully - provided you enter the correct URI, which is:

ipp://192.168.1.105:631/lp1

And if it would be helpful, here is the nmap:

Interesting ports on 192.168.1.105:
(The 1653 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed)
PORT    STATE SERVICE
23/tcp  open  telnet
80/tcp  open  http
515/tcp open  printer
631/tcp open  ipp

Comment 5 Cristian Tibirna 2005-08-22 17:30:55 UTC
UNCONFIRMED (batch reassigning messed this)