IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> PRO> : HTTP vs. HTTP-lite; HTTP headers?

IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> PRO> : HTTP vs. HTTP-lite; HTTP headers?

Re: IPP> PRO> : HTTP vs. HTTP-lite; HTTP headers?

Carl Kugler (kugler@us.ibm.com)
25 Aug 1998 14:56:26 -0000

# I doubt there is a golden document somewhere that specifies how the
> # browsers exactly deal with the all caches and all flavors of proxy
> # servers around.
>
> If a response includes
> Cache-control: no-cache
> then there should not be any difficulty with IPP and caching.
> Print clients shouldn't need to say anything about caching, just print
> servers, and the only thing servers need to say is about cache expiry
> for information that shouldn't be cached.
>
> It more likely a feature that static information returned from
> querying a printer about its configuration can be cached.
>
> Larry
>
>

I'm having trouble understanding section 4. Encoding of Transport Layer, in PRO 6/30. If I understand the table in section 4.1, it says, for General-Header Cache-Control,

- the client MUST send the header in a Request
- the server SHOULD NOT support the header in a Request. It is not relevant to an IPP implementation.
- the server MUST send the header in a Response
- the client SHOULD NOT support the header in a Response. It is not relevant to an IPP implementation.

What is the definition of "support" in this context? Why MUST we send a header which the receiver SHOULD NOT support? The same questions apply to the "Pragma" header.

-Carl

-----
Original Message: http://www.findmail.com/list/ipp/?start=79
Start a FREE email list at http://www.FindMail.com/