IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> Minutes of IPP Weekly Conference call - Nove. 12, 1997

Re: IPP> Minutes of IPP Weekly Conference call - Nove. 12, 1997

Scott Lawrence (lawrence@agranat.com)
Thu, 13 Nov 1997 09:41:24 -0500

The agreement Roger describes sounds good; one minor nit...

RKD> 9) If a client somehow derives a URI and tries to connect and the
RKD> service (e.g. Printer-URI) has been turned-off, an appropriate
RKD> http error code will be returned.

Why impose that requirement? That would mean that a printer without
security (for whatever reason) would need to listen on the TLS port
and implement enough of the handshake to negotiate no security so
that it can send an HTTP error. Similarly, a secure-only server
would need to listen on the unsecured port just to send an HTTP
error. Just let TCP do the right thing - if they've constructed an
invalid URI (one with the wrong scheme or port number in it), then
it won't work, which is what should happen. It really isn't the
business of the IPP spec to say what will happen on a TCP port on
which IPP is not available.

--
Scott Lawrence           EmWeb Embedded Server       <lawrence@agranat.com>
Agranat Systems, Inc.        Engineering            http://www.agranat.com/