IPP> PRO - New I-D - Known HTTP Proxy/Caching Problems

IPP> PRO - New I-D - Known HTTP Proxy/Caching Problems

McDonald, Ira imcdonald at sharplabs.com
Mon Apr 3 18:58:20 EDT 2000


Hi Carl-Uno,

Point taken - certainly on port 631 you don't get recognized 
as HTTP at all by most infrastructure servers.

For IPP/1.0 (or later) products that are configurable to use
port 80 (and many are because they don't pass through firewalls
at all otherwise), the problems are relevant.

Cheers, 
- Ira McDonald

-----Original Message-----
From: Manros, Carl-Uno B [mailto:cmanros at cp10.es.xerox.com]
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 3:46 PM
To: McDonald, Ira; 'ipp at pwg.org'
Subject: RE: IPP> PRO - New I-D - Known HTTP Proxy/Caching Problems


Ira,

It was suggested in the IETF-IPP meeting that we can probably avoid 
most of these problems by always using port 631.

Carl-Uno

-----Original Message-----
From: McDonald, Ira [mailto:imcdonald at sharplabs.com]
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 3:30 PM
To: 'ipp at pwg.org'
Subject: IPP> PRO - New I-D - Known HTTP Proxy/Caching Problems


Hi folks,

Interesting recent I-D from IETF Web Replication and
Caching (WREC) WG:

"Known HTTP Proxy/Caching Problems"
<draft-ietf-wrec-known-prob-01.txt> (10 March 2000)

One of the documented problems is called:

"Lack of HTTP/1.1 compliance for proxy caches"

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald, consulting architect at Xerox and Sharp
  High North Inc



More information about the Ipp mailing list