IFX Mail Archive: Re: IFX> Re: IPP> New data types

Re: IFX> Re: IPP> New data types

From: pmoore@netreon.com
Date: Mon Jan 29 2001 - 16:23:42 EST

Next message: MAEDA toru: "IFX> Scalng in Classic Fax"

Previous message: Michael Sweet: "Re: IFX> Re: IPP> New data types"
Maybe in reply to: Michael Sweet: "IFX> Re: IPP> New data types"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

gosh - you are right - the length is signed - thats not right - lengths should
be unsigned.

"Carl Kugler" <kugler@us.ibm.com> on 01/29/2001 01:08:29 PM

To: Michael Sweet <mike@easysw.com>
cc: Paul Moore/AUCO/US@AUCO, Mike Bartman <bartman@process.com>, ipp@pwg.org,
ifx@pwg.org

Subject: Re: IFX> Re: IPP> New data types

Since the length field is SIGNED-SHORT (2BYTE). I think it probably only
goes up to 32,767.

-Carl

Michael Sweet <mike@easysw.com>@pwg.org on 01/29/2001 01:17:24 PM

Sent by: owner-ifx@pwg.org

To: pmoore@netreon.com
cc: Mike Bartman <bartman@process.com>, ipp@pwg.org, ifx@pwg.org
Subject: IFX> Re: IPP> New data types

pmoore@netreon.com wrote:
>
> I had had similar thoughts (I was imagining Text, BigText (16-bit)
> and HugeText (32-bit))
> ...

Except that the length field in the current IPP encoding only
supports values up to 65535 octets in length...

--
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products                  mike@easysw.com
Printing Software for UNIX                       http://www.easysw.com

Next message: MAEDA toru: "IFX> Scalng in Classic Fax"
Previous message: Michael Sweet: "Re: IFX> Re: IPP> New data types"
Maybe in reply to: Michael Sweet: "IFX> Re: IPP> New data types"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 29 2001 - 16:26:32 EST