IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme

Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme

Randy Turner (rturner@sharplabs.com)
Mon, 13 Jul 1998 08:43:50 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Carl Kugler: "Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"
Previous message: Keith Moore: "Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"
In reply to: Keith Moore: "Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"
Next in thread: Bennett, Joel H: "RE: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"

I can appreciate the need for compromise, given your earlier message, but
I'm not sure I completely understand the difference between your
compromise, and our "ipp:" URL usage model that we sent out to you. It
looks like you're suggesting using the HTTP header part of our proposal,
and trying to use "ipp:" URLs within the application/ipp
part where appropriate, which is basically what our usage model stated.

Could you do a "diff" on our document and your compromise for the DL?

Thanks

Randy

Next message: Carl Kugler: "Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"
Previous message: Keith Moore: "Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"
In reply to: Keith Moore: "Re: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"
Next in thread: Bennett, Joel H: "RE: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme"