>Also, in this section, however, we should put some words like...
>
> "It will be suggested (in section 5) that Clients identify Printer objects
> using an HTTP type URL. One element of this proposal will be to further
> recommend the establishment, through IANA, of a well known port (380
> recommended) for printing via HTTP. The purpose of this well known port
> would be to distinguish printing from non-printing content. While any
> acceptable HTTP content could be inter-mixed over HTTP well known port 80,
> only HTTP printing would be acceptable on port 380.
>
> The remainder of this draft will define the IPP content for HTTP printing,
> including IPP objects, operations, naming and attributes."
>
>Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems
>
Harry,
I brought up this subject with Larry Masinter (who is the IETF HTTP Chair)
when I met him last week. He claims that the HTTP does not really care about
the port number and that hence it would be no point in using a different
number fore the printing protocol. Can somebody else, who is supplying Web
servers, verify this?
Carl-Uno
Carl-Uno Manros
Xerox Corporation
701 S. Aviation Blvd.
M/S: ESAE-231
El Segundo, CA 90245, USA
E-mail: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com