Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme
Randy Turner <rturner@sharplabs.com> Thu, 16 July 1998 04:51 UTC
Delivery-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 00:51:39 -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 AAA07768
for <ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 00:51:37 -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 AAA18875
for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 00:51:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com
(8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA05319 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>;
Thu, 16 Jul 1998 00:51:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 16 Jul 1998 00:45:26 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id
AAA04766 for ipp-outgoing; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 00:42:05 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199807160444.VAA23643@mail.pacifier.com>
X-Sender: rturner@webmail.sharplabs.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 21:38:06 -0700
To: Robert Herriot <robert.herriot@Eng.Sun.COM>
From: Randy Turner <rturner@sharplabs.com>
Subject: Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme
Cc: ipp@pwg.org
In-Reply-To: <199807160135.SAA22438@woden.eng.sun.com>
References: <199807142203.SAA11719@spot.cs.utk.edu> <Your message of "Tue,
14 Jul 1998 13:56:36 PDT." <199807142050.NAA21208@woden.eng.sun.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-ipp@pwg.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ietf.org id AAA07768
I read the action items below and it appears very close to our previous usage model. Except below, this version says the IPP server "SHOULD" accept "ipp:" URLs wherein I would think this would be a "MUST", since later on it mentions that this document does not discuss what a server does with any other URL scheme it sees. (?) Randy At 06:41 PM 7/15/98 -0700, Robert Herriot wrote: > > Action item from Robert Herriot and Tom Hastings: > > The IPP working group reached an agreement with Keith Moore in this > morning's teleconference. This document is our best understanding of the > details of this agreement. > > Summary: > > The quick summary is that IPP should support a new scheme 'ipp', which > clients and servers use in IPP attributes. Such attributes are in a message > body whose Content-Type is application/ipp. A client maps 'ipp' URLs to > 'http' URLs, and then follows the HTTP/1.1 rules for constructing a > Request-Line and HTTP headers. The IPP document will not prohibit > implementations from supporting other schemes in IPP attributes, but such > support is not defined by this document. > > Now for the details. > > A client and an IPP object (i.e. the server) SHOULD support the 'ipp' scheme > in the following IPP attributes. Each of these attributes identifies a > printer or job object. The 'ipp' scheme is not intended for use in 'uri' > valued attributes not in this list. > > job attributes - > job-uri > job-printer-uri > printer attributes - > printer-uri-supported > operation attributes - > job-uri > printer-uri > > If the scheme of the target URL in a request (i.e. the value of > "printer-uri" or "job-uri" operation attribute) is some scheme 'x', other > than 'ipp', the behavior of the IPP object is not defined by this document. > However, it is RECOMMENDED that if an operation on an IPP object creates a > new value for any of the above attributes, that attribute has the same > scheme 'x'. It is also RECOMMENDED that if an IPP object returns any of the > seven attributes above in the response, that the IPP object returns those > URL values as is, regardless of the scheme of the target URL. > > If the client obtains a target URL from a directory service, the scheme of > the target URL SHOULD be 'ipp'. If the scheme is not 'ipp', the behavior of > the client is not defined by this document, but it is RECOMMENDED that the > client use the URL as is as the target URL. > > Although user interfaces are beyond the scope of this document, it is > RECOMMENDED that if software exposes the URL values of any of the above > seven attributes to a human user, that the human see the URL as is. > > When a client sends a request, it MUST convert an 'ipp' target URL to an > 'http' target URL for use in the HTTP Request-Line and HTTP headers as > specified by HTTP/1.1. However, the 'ipp' target URL remains as is for the > value of the "printer-uri" or "job-uri" attribute in the message body. If > the scheme of the target URL is not 'ipp', the behavior of the client is not > defined by this document, but it is RECOMMENDED that the client use the > target URL as is in the Request-Line and HTTP headers. > > A client converts an 'ipp' URL to an 'http' URL by > 1) replacing the 'ipp' scheme by 'http' > 2) adding an explicit port 631 if the URL does not contain an explicit > port. > > When an IPP client sends a request directly (i.e. no proxy) to an ipp URL > such as ipp://myhost.com/myprinter/myqueue, it MUST open a TCP connection > to some port (this example uses the IPP default port 631) on some host > (myhost.com in this example) with the following headers: > > POST /myprinter/myqueue HTTP/1.1 > Host: myhost.com:631 > Content-type: application/ipp > Transfer-Encoding: chunked > ... > "printer-uri" "ipp://myhost.com/myprinter/myqueue" > (encoded in application/ipp message body) > ... > > When an IPP client sends a request via a proxy, such as myproxy.com, to an > ipp URL, such as ipp://myhost.com/myprinter/myqueue, it MUST open a TCP > connection to some port (8080 in this example) on some proxy (myproxy.com > in this example) with the following headers: > > > POST > <http://myhost.com:631/myprinter/myqueue>http://myhost.com:631/myprinter/m > yqueue HTTP/1.1 > Host: myproxy.com:8080 > Content-type: application/ipp > Transfer-Encoding: chunked > ... > "printer-uri" "ipp://myhost.com/myprinter/myqueue" > (encoded in application/ipp message body) > ... > > The proxy then connects to the IPP origin server with headers that are the > same as the "no-proxy" example above. > >
- IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme don
- IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Keith Moore
- IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme don
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Scott Lawrence
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme don
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Keith Moore
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Larry Masinter
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Jim Walker
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme don
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Larry Masinter
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Robert Herriot
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Keith Moore
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Robert Herriot
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Keith Moore
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Robert Herriot
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Randy Turner
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Carl Kugler
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme don
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Carl Kugler
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Jay Martin
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Roger K Debry
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme don
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Robert Herriot
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Carl Kugler
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Jay Martin
- IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Keith Moore
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme don
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme papowell
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme papowell
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Carl Kugler
- RE: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Manros, Carl-Uno B
- Re: IPP> Re: New IPP Scheme Robert Herriot