Carl,
The suggestion from the IETF 47 meeting was that multi-part MIME would not
buy us anything.
We can already send multiple responses in a single application/ipp MIME part
with our current encoding.
Carl-Uno
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ipp@pwg.org [mailto:owner-ipp@pwg.org]On Behalf Of Carl Kugler
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 7:58 AM
To: ipp@pwg.org
Subject: IPP> Minutes of IPP Working Group Meeting April 4-5, 2000
>There were a few HTTP Issues that were raised at the IETF Plenary meeting
about the ippget:
> delivery method:
...
> - Should each response-part be a separate message body in MIME
multi-part?
> At the IETF Plenary meeting, it was determined that MIME multi-part
should not be used for
> delivery notification.
What was the justification for this determination? The only argument I've
ever heard is that multipart might get hosed up going through proxies.
However, we already know from
"Known HTTP Proxy/Caching Problems"
<draft-ietf-wrec-known-prob-01.txt> (10 March 2000)
(see thread at
http://www.egroups.com/message/ipp/7102?&start=7086&threaded=1) that sending
IPP through existing proxies is a very doubtful proposition anyway.
Or has the group accepted the idea of a multipart response but rejected
the MIME encoding?
-Carl
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/minutes/ipp-minutes-000404.txt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 27 2000 - 11:21:24 EDT