Subject: Re: IPP> Implications of introducing new scheme and port for existing

From: Carl Kugler <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 15:31:59 -0600

> 1) the introduction of a new scheme called "ipp"
>
Not a problem for the case in which the client talks directly to the
origin server.  In fact, the scheme isn't part of the HTTP request
message in this case;  it's more of a hint to the client about how to
connect to the server.

Big problem for proxy servers, though.  An existing proxy server
wouldn't know how to proxy a request to an absolute URI with an "ipp"
scheme.

And not all proxies are firewalls.  Sometimes they're used for caching
(e.g., to reduce transoceanic traffic in an intranet).

> 2) the introduction a new default port number for IPP servers.
>
No major implications from my point of view.

http://pwg.org/hypermail/ipp/0523.html
IPP> Implications of introducing new scheme and port for existing

Carl-Uno Manros ([email-masked])

Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:20:01 PDT

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Next message: Ted Hardie: "IPP> Re: Implications of introducing new scheme and port for existing HTTP servers"

Previous message: Paul Moore: "RE: IPP> review of IPP documents"

Next in thread: [email-masked]: "Re: IPP> Implications of introducing new scheme and port f"

Hi,

As most of you know already, the Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) WG has

suggested using HTTP as "transport", with the payload in the form of a MIME

object passed with the POST method.

As part of the onging IESG review process, the Application Area Director

Keith Moore has suggested to distinguish IPP traffic from "normal" HTTP

traffic by:

1) the introduction of a new scheme called "ipp"

2) the introduction a new default port number for IPP servers.

Before the IPP WG responds to those suggestions, the IPP WG would like to

get some advice from the HTTP WG on the implications of such a change.

In particular, we want some feedback on how easy or difficult it would be

to configure existing web servers to accomodate the suggested changes.

Please note that many printer vendors are not in the business of developing

web servers or HTTP servers and are dependent on getting those compoments

from other vendors.

Please respond back to the IPP DL at:

[email-masked]

Thanks,

Carl-Uno Manros

Chair of the IETF IPP WG

Next message: Ted Hardie: "IPP> Re: Implications of introducing new scheme and port for existing HTTP servers"

Previous message: Paul Moore: "RE: IPP> review of IPP documents"

Next in thread: [email-masked]: "Re: IPP> Implications of introducing new scheme and port f"