There is alot of overlap with the status conditions and associated
messages between HTTP 1.1 and the proposal for IPP. An IPP client that
uses HTTP 1.1 could simply pass back the HTTP 1.1 messages asis in the
response to an IPP application.
Keith
---------------------- Forwarded by Keith Carter on 04-24-97 01:36 PM
---------------------------
DELEGATE @ AUSVMR
04-23-97 02:19 PM
To: Keith Carter
cc:
Subject: IPP> MOD - RE: STATUS CODES
To: KCARTER --AUSNOTES
From: DELEGATE
Subject: IPP> MOD - RE: STATUS CODES
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
H The following note is being forwarded from KCARTER at AUSVMR. H
H DO NOT USE the F6 REPLY function to reply to this note. You must H
H contact the sender directly if you wish to reply, and not DELEGATE. H
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
---------------------------- Note: -------------------------------------
Received: from lists.underscore.com by vnet.IBM.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with
Wed, 23 Apr 97 12:28:56 EDT
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com
(8.7.5/8.7
Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Wed, 23 Apr 1997 12:27:16 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id
MAA
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970423092134.00fb5a78@garfield>
X-Sender: cmanros@garfield
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 09:21:34 PDT
To: Keith_Carter@aussmtp.austin.ibm.com, ipp@pwg.org
From: Carl-Uno Manros <cmanros@cp10.es.xerox.com>
Subject: IPP> MOD - RE: Status codes
In-Reply-To: <9704231031.AA12805@norman.cp10.es.xerox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: ipp-owner@pwg.org
At 08:22 AM 4/22/97 PDT, Keith_Carter@aussmtp.austin.ibm.com wrote:
>
>
> Attached is a proposal for status code defintions. I
> borrowed the design approach and applicable text from the
> HTTP 1.1 RFC (RFC 2068). If this proposal is incorporated
> into the IPP Model document, maybe we should include an
> acknowledgement to the authors of HTTP 1.1 in the document.
>
Keith,
just a question for clarification. You mentioned that you have taken
much of this from the HTTP specification. Does that mean that we are
in effect duplicating error messages that would already be given on
the HTTP level, assuming that we have mapped IPP to HTTP?
Carl-Uno
Carl-Uno Manros
Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
Email: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com
>>>> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS NOTE <<<<