IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> IPP/NV: SASL vs. HTTP-TLS-UPGRADE

Re: IPP> IPP/NV: SASL vs. HTTP-TLS-UPGRADE

Randy Turner (jrturner@pacifier.com)
Sat, 21 Nov 1998 07:23:50 +0000

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org: "IPP> I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipp-lpd-ipp-map-05.txt"
Previous message: Carl Kugler: "Re: RE: IPP> IPP/NV: SASL vs. HTTP-TLS-UPGRADE"
Maybe in reply to: Carl Kugler: "IPP> IPP/NV: SASL vs. HTTP-TLS-UPGRADE"

Yes, I believe the Upgrade: method is also bi-directional, or so it would seem so far in my interpretation of the draft.

Randy

Carl Kugler wrote:

> > The SASL capability is bi-directional, it can allow either side to mandate
> > secure connections.
> >
> Looks to me like HTTP-TLS-UPGRADE is also bi-directional. The client can initiate an upgrade to TLS by putting an "Upgrade:" header in the request, and/or the server can require the client to upgrade by returning a "418: Upgrade Required" error code in response to a request.
>
> -Carl
>
> -----
> See the original message at http://www.egroups.com/list/ipp/?start=4920

Next message: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org: "IPP> I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipp-lpd-ipp-map-05.txt"
Previous message: Carl Kugler: "Re: RE: IPP> IPP/NV: SASL vs. HTTP-TLS-UPGRADE"
Maybe in reply to: Carl Kugler: "IPP> IPP/NV: SASL vs. HTTP-TLS-UPGRADE"