On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 18:29:57 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak <kyrre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What if there was some kind of "chanel" system - i.e. you could join the > "physics department" chanel, and only printers shared to this channel, > would be seen. This idea doesn't solve any of the problems I express if the broadcasting cups server gets to select for itself which channel it is in. Active channels can still be dynamic membership and too long to be usably browsable in the print dialog ui. Active channels still require that every broadcasting cups server on the network be correctly configured to mean anything. On large de-centralized networks... clients can not depend on any broadcasting service to be correctly configured. And its absolutely worse on networks that merely tolerate linux installs but do not have centralized support for linux at all. Administrators for linux machines acting a clients for a service such as cups needs to have an easy way to say 'ignore that specific cups server at ip address W.X.Y.Z its clearly misconfigured and being run by as gentoo zealot who doesn't know how to tie their own shoes and since there is no way I can talk sense into them to reconfigure their cups I need to take local action and disable their cups ques from showing up on my systems to avoid my users acidently trying to use that moron's private printer' I should be able to 'register' selected printers individually and hide the rest. Active channels just complicate the problem by adding yet another piece of information that can be misconfigured on the broadcasting cups server my client computer has the misfortune to notice. The simpliest control on the client side.. is to be able to register individual ques or individual cups servers... and hide the rest from view until a new printer needs to be found. -jef"hostile de-centralized networks do exist....for services that broadcast.. local clients need to have tools that can be taught how to ignore rogue broadcasting servers"spaleta