IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> Re: Implications of introducing new scheme and port

IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> Re: Implications of introducing new scheme and port

Re: IPP> Re: Implications of introducing new scheme and port

Keith Moore (moore@cs.utk.edu)
Tue, 09 Jun 1998 15:28:26 -0400

I've been thinking about the interaction of an ipp: URL and
the installed base of proxies that support http: but will not
understand ipp:

Whenever an IPP client is configured to use a proxy, it would probably
make sense to have the client send
"POST http://foo.bar:XXX/zot HTTP/1.1" to the proxy when attempting
to talk to the ipp object "ipp://foo.bar/zot".

As far as I can tell from a very casual analysis, this is the only
place where it would be necessary to actually send the string "http:"
to refer to a ipp object. Every other URI that refers to a ipp object
could use "ipp:" instead.

I don't see a problem with doing things this way, as long as it's
clearly documented. Perhaps it would be wise to add a section called
something like "Tunneling of IPP requests over HTTP proxies" to the
protocol document that specified such details.

Keith