Re: RE: IPP> Implementation question re.: chunking

"Carl Kugler" <kugler@us.ibm.com> Fri, 24 July 1998 19:36 UTC

Delivery-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:36:25 -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 PAA24738 for <ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:36:24 -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 PAA19114 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:36:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA06226 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:36:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:32:31 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA05668 for ipp-outgoing; Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:30:16 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:29:18 -0000
Message-ID: <19980724192918.13710.qmail@m2.findmail.com>
From: Carl Kugler <kugler@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: RE: IPP> Implementation question re.: chunking
In-Reply-To: <CB6657D3A5E0D111A97700805FFE6587BF6F39@red-msg-51.dns.microsoft.com>
To: ipp@pwg.org
Sender: owner-ipp@pwg.org

HTTP/1.1 imlies chunking.  Quote:  draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-rev-03, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", section 3.6.1, "Chunked Transfer Coding":

    "All HTTP/1.1 applications MUST be able to receive and decode the “chunked” transfer coding..."

    -Carl

>I dont see where it says that a server must support chunking. It says I must
> support 1.1. Maybe I am reading it wrong (I guess thats why we have
> bake-offs)
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	Turner, Randy [SMTP:rturner@sharplabs.com]
> > Sent:	Friday, July 24, 1998 10:48 AM
> > To:	'ipp@pwg.org'
> > Subject:	RE: IPP> Implementation question re.:  chunking
> > 
> > 
> > Well, I'm assuming since we "last-call'd" these documents in the WG,
> > that everybody is in agreement that an implementation that doesn't
> > support chunking isn't compliant.
> > 
> > Randy
> > 
> > 
> > 		-----Original Message-----
> > 		From:	Paul Moore [mailto:paulmo@microsoft.com]
> > 		Sent:	Friday, July 24, 1998 10:25 AM
> > 		To:	'Randy Turner'; Carl Kugler
> > 		Cc:	ipp@pwg.org
> > 		Subject:	RE: IPP> Implementation question re.:
> > chunking
> > 
> > 		You might find that some implementations dont support
> > chunking.
> > 
> > 		> -----Original Message-----
> > 		> From:	Randy Turner [SMTP:rturner@sharplabs.com]
> > 		> Sent:	Friday, July 24, 1998 10:05 AM
> > 		> To:	Carl Kugler
> > 		> Cc:	ipp@pwg.org
> > 		> Subject:	Re: IPP> Implementation question re.:
> > chunking
> > 		> 
> > 		> At 04:51 PM 7/24/98 +0000, you wrote:
> > 		> >draft-ietf-ipp-protocol-06.txt says the client and
> > server MUST support
> > 		> the
> > 		> "chunked" transfer encoding when receiving.  My
> > question is:  Can we count
> > 		> on this?  I.e., if our client always transmits
> > requests using the
> > 		> "chunked"
> > 		> transfer encoding, will we be able to interoperate
> > with the vast majority
> > 		> of IPP server implementations?
> > 		> >
> > 		> >    -Carl
> > 		> 
> > 		> 
> > 		> There are no vast majority of IPP server
> > implementations (yet). I think
> > 		> the
> > 		> only worry is if someone plans to deploy IPP behind a
> > generic web server
> > 		> that doesn't support chunking. However, Apache and
> > most other of the more
> > 		> popular HTTP/1.1 servers will support this. It should
> > definitely be a
> > 		> bullet item (checkoff item) at the upcoming bake-off,
> > however.
> > 		> 
> > 		> Randy
> > 		> 
> > 		> > 
> 
> 



-----
Original Message: http://www.findmail.com/list/ipp/?start=4181
Start a FREE email list at http://www.FindMail.com/