IPP> MOD - Status codes

IPP> MOD - Status codes

IPP> MOD - Status codes

Robert Herriot Robert.Herriot at Eng.Sun.COM
Wed Apr 23 20:53:41 EDT 1997


Thanks, Keith for doing all this work.  The functionality seems
to be mostly right, but I would expect that it would be better
to use the same Status codes as HTTP uses wherever there is overlap.
My table below shows that there is considerable overlap.


The following are the HTTP errors listed in RFC2068, plus the
functionality suggested by Keith.


I have put a mark in column 1 to denote:
   x should be in IPP Version 1.0
   f may be in a future version, so don't reuse error code
   i new concept for IPP not in HTTP (I started these error codes at x51)
 <blank> HTTP codes that IPP probably doesn't need, but I don't
     suggest reusing them.


I have put a k in column 2 if it was on Keith's list, and I have
put Keith's error number next to the k so you can see the similarities.


      Informational 1xx 
f     100 Continue 
f     101 Switching Protocols 
      Successful 2xx
xk000 200 OK 
x     201 Created  (for CreateJob instead of 200)
f     202 Accepted 
      203 Non-Authoritative Information 
x     204 No Content  (no entity body returned, e.g. with CancelJob)
      205 Reset Content 
      206 Partial Content 
ik001 251 OK Attribute Substitution/Attribute Ignored
          Tom suggested splitting these two. I disagree because both
          errors may occur in the same job. Details, if any, could
          be in the application/IPP entity body.
          We could also remove this error and put such information in
          the entity body and then use the 201 status code.
      Redirection 3xx 
      300 Multiple Choices 
f     301 Moved Permanently 
f     302 Moved Temporarily 
      303 See Other 
f     304 Not Modified 
      305 Use Proxy 
      Client Error 4xx 
xk100 400 Bad Request 
xk101 401 Unauthorized 
xk102 402 Payment Required 
xk103 403 Forbidden 
xk106 404 Not Found 
xk104 405 Method Not Allowed 
 k105   ? I don't think that a server should distiguish between "Forbidden"
             and "Operation Not Authorized". Generally security people
             don't like to be very specific about why a person was
             disallowed.
x     406 Not Acceptable 
      407 Proxy Authentication Required 
f     408 Request Timeout 
      409 Conflict 
xk107 410 Gone 
x     411 Length Required 
      412 Precondition Failed 
x     413 Request Entity Too Large 
x     414 Request-URI Too Long 
      415 Unsupported Media Type 
ik109 451 Attribute Not Implemented/Attribute Value Not Supported
          Tom suggested splitting these two. I disagree because both
          errors may occur in the same job. Details, if any, could
          be in the application/IPP entity body.
      Server Error 5xx 
xk200 500 Internal Server Error 
xk203 501 Not Implemented 
      502 Bad Gateway 
xk201 503 Service Unavailable 
      504 Gateway Timeout 
xk202 505 HTTP Version Not Supported 
 k204 551 Printer Error
 k300 I don't understand how the protocol generates what seems to
      be a client connection problem



More information about the Ipp mailing list