IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP>PRO another reason for needing byterange and document

Re: IPP>PRO another reason for needing byterange and document

Carl-Uno Manros (manros@mindspring.com)
Sat, 10 May 1997 18:05:37 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Scott Isaacson: "IPP> MOD - new model document"
Previous message: Robert Herriot: "Re: IPP>PRO another reason for needing byterange and document number"

At 11:10 PM 5/9/97 -0400, JK Martin wrote:
>Is IPP expected to support checkpointing to the point where the
>client will resume submission of document at *precisely* the point
>where the transmission failed?
>
>I wouldn't think so. Rather, the client would resume transmission
>at the *start* of the document that failed.
>
>Is this true?
>
> ...jay
>

Jay,

starting over from the beginning is not checkpointing in my book.
The whole point of checkpointing is so that you do not have to
start a big transmission over again from the beginning.

Carl-Uno

Next message: Scott Isaacson: "IPP> MOD - new model document"
Previous message: Robert Herriot: "Re: IPP>PRO another reason for needing byterange and document number"