I agree with Jay. We should register a port for IPP, as Jay suggests:
Now that we have RFC numbers for IPP/1.0 we have a good reference to use in
the PMP channel registration for IPP. The IPP/1.0 Model and Semantics
is RFC 2566 and the IPP/1.0 Encoding and Transport is RFC 2565 (both
-- Internet Printing Protocol (IPP)
-- See documents relating to IPP 1.0
-- (RFCs 2565 and 2566).
I'm not sure whether we should mention anything about future IPP versions or
Can you add this to the draft Printer MIB document?
Furthermore, chPortHTTP(42) could be used for file up load submission of
print jobs using the file up load feature of HTTP. Here is the HTTP
-- Hypertext Transfer Protocol. See IETF
-- documents relating to HTTP 1.0/1.1
-- (RFCs 1945 and 2068,etc.)
From: Jay Martin [mailto:jkm at underscore.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 1999 10:28
To: harryl at us.ibm.com
Cc: pmp at pwg.org; ipp at pwg.org
Subject: IPP> Re: PMP> IPP "channel" in the Printer MIB
I would hope a more explicit channel name represents IPP,
something like "chIPP".
harryl at us.ibm.com wrote:
>> I haven't seen any attempt to register an IPP channel for the Printer MIB.
> Shouldn't we? Or do we assume chPortHTTP (42) covers it?
>> Harry Lewis
> IBM Printing Systems
>harryl at us.ibm.com