📄 rfc2565.txt
字号:
The type of the value in the model document determines the encoding
in the value and the value of the value-tag.
3.12 Data
The data part MUST include any data required by the operation
4. Encoding of Transport Layer
HTTP/1.1 [RFC2068] is the transport layer for this protocol.
The operation layer has been designed with the assumption that the
transport layer contains the following information:
- the URI of the target job or printer operation
- the total length of the data in the operation layer, either as a
single length or as a sequence of chunks each with a length.
It is REQUIRED that a printer implementation support HTTP over the
IANA assigned Well Known Port 631 (the IPP default port), though a
printer implementation may support HTTP over some other port as well.
In addition, a printer may have to support another port for privacy
(See Section 5 "Security Considerations").
Note: even though port 631 is the IPP default, port 80 remains the
default for an HTTP URI. Thus a URI for a printer using port 631
MUST contain an explicit port, e.g. "http://forest:631/pinetree". An
HTTP URI for IPP with no explicit port implicitly reference port 80,
which is consistent with the rules for HTTP/1.1. Each HTTP operation
MUST use the POST method where the request-URI is the object target
of the operation, and where the "Content-Type" of the message-body in
each request and response MUST be "application/ipp". The message-body
MUST contain the operation layer and MUST have the syntax described
in section 3.2 "Syntax of Encoding". A client implementation MUST
adhere to the rules for a client described for HTTP1.1 [RFC2068]. A
printer (server) implementation MUST adhere the rules for an origin
server described for HTTP1.1 [RFC2068].
An IPP server sends a response for each request that it receives. If
an IPP server detects an error, it MAY send a response before it has
read the entire request. If the HTTP layer of the IPP server
completes processing the HTTP headers successfully, it MAY send an
Herriot, et al. Experimental [Page 18]
RFC 2565 IPP/1.0: Encoding and Transport April 1999
intermediate response, such as "100 Continue", with no IPP data
before sending the IPP response. A client MUST expect such a variety
of responses from an IPP server. For further information on HTTP/1.1,
consult the HTTP documents [RFC2068].
5. Security Considerations
The IPP Model document defines an IPP implementation with "privacy"
as one that implements Secure Socket Layer Version 3 (SSL3). Note:
SSL3 is not an IETF standards track specification. SSL3 meets the
requirements for IPP security with regards to features such as mutual
authentication and privacy (via encryption). The IPP Model document
also outlines IPP-specific security considerations and should be the
primary reference for security implications with regards to the IPP
protocol itself.
The IPP Model document defines an IPP implementation with
"authentication" as one that implements the standard way for
transporting IPP messages within HTTP 1.1. These include the security
considerations outlined in the HTTP 1.1 standard document [RFC2068]
and Digest Access Authentication extension [RFC2069].
The current HTTP infrastructure supports HTTP over TCP port 80. IPP
server implementations MUST offer IPP services using HTTP over the
IANA assigned Well Known Port 631 (the IPP default port). IPP server
implementations may support other ports, in addition to this port.
See further discussion of IPP security concepts in the model document
[RFC2566].
5.1 Using IPP with SSL3
An assumption is that the URI for a secure IPP Printer object has
been found by means outside the IPP printing protocol, via a
directory service, web site or other means.
IPP provides a transparent connection to SSL by calling the
corresponding URL (a https URI connects by default to port 443).
However, the following functions can be provided to ease the
integration of IPP with SSL during implementation:
connect (URI), returns a status
"connect" makes an https call and returns the immediate status
of the connection as returned by SSL to the user. The status
values are explained in section 5.4.2 of the SSL document
[ssl].
Herriot, et al. Experimental [Page 19]
RFC 2565 IPP/1.0: Encoding and Transport April 1999
A session-id may also be retained to later resume a session.
The SSL handshake protocol may also require the cipher
specifications supported by the client, key length of the
ciphers, compression methods, certificates, etc. These should
be sent to the server and hence should be available to the IPP
client (although as part of administration features).
disconnect (session)
to disconnect a particular session.
The session-id available from the "connect" could be used.
resume (session)
to reconnect using a previous session-id.
The availability of this information as administration features are
left for implementers, and need not be specified at this time.
6. References
[RFC2278] Freed, N. and J. Postel, "IANA Charset Registration
Procedures", BCP 19, RFC 2278, January 1998.
[dpa] ISO/IEC 10175 Document Printing Application (DPA), June
1996.
[iana] IANA Registry of Coded Character Sets:
ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/character-sets.
[ipp-iig] Hastings, Tom, et al., "Internet Printing Protocol/1.0:
Implementer's Guide", Work in Progress.
[RFC2569] Herriot, R., Hastings, T., Jacobs, N. and J. Martin,
"Mapping between LPD and IPP Protocols", RFC 2569, April
1999.
[RFC2566] deBry, R., Hastings, T., Herriot, R., Isaacson, S. and P.
Powell, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.0: Model and
Semantics", RFC 2566, April 1999.
[RFC2565] Herriot, R., Butler, S., Moore, P., Tuner, R., "Internet
Printing Protocol/1.0: Encoding and Transport", RFC 2565,
April 1999.
Herriot, et al. Experimental [Page 20]
RFC 2565 IPP/1.0: Encoding and Transport April 1999
[RFC2568] Zilles, S., "Rationale for the Structure and Model and
Protocol for the Internet Printing Protocol", RFC 2568,
April 1999.
[RFC2567] Wright, D., "Design Goals for an Internet Printing
Protocol", RFC 2567, April 1999.
[RFC822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text
Messages", STD 11, RFC 822, August 1982.
[RFC1123] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application
and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989.
[RFC1179] McLaughlin, L. III, (editor), "Line Printer Daemon
Protocol" RFC 1179, August 1990.
[RFC2223] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Instructions to RFC Authors",
RFC 2223, October 1997.
[RFC1738] Berners-Lee, T., Masinter, L. and M. McCahill, "Uniform
Resource Locators (URL)", RFC 1738, December 1994.
[RFC1759] Smith, R., Wright, F., Hastings, T., Zilles, S. and J.
Gyllenskog, "Printer MIB", RFC 1759, March 1995.
[RFC1766] Alvestrand, H., " Tags for the Identification of
Languages", RFC 1766, March 1995.
[RFC1808] Fielding, R., "Relative Uniform Resource Locators", RFC
1808, June 1995.
[RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D. and J. Schoenwaelder, "Textual
Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999.
[RFC2046] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046,
November 1996.
[RFC2048] Freed, N., Klensin J. and J. Postel. Multipurpose Internet
Mail Extension (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures",
BCP 13, RFC 2048, November 1996.
[RFC2068] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H. and T.
Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC
2068, January 1997.
Herriot, et al. Experimental [Page 21]
RFC 2565 IPP/1.0: Encoding and Transport April 1999
[RFC2069] Franks, J., Hallam-Baker, P., Hostetler, J., Leach, P.,
Luotonen, A., Sink, E. and L. Stewart, "An Extension to
HTTP: Digest Access Authentication", RFC 2069, January
1997.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2184] Freed, N. and K. Moore, "MIME Parameter Value and Encoded
Word Extensions: Character Sets, Languages, and
Continuations", RFC 2184, August 1997.
[RFC2234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234. November 1997.
[RFC2396] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396,
August 1998.
7. Authors' Addresses
Robert Herriot (Editor)
Xerox Corporation
3400 Hillview Ave., Bldg #1
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Phone: 650-813-7696
Fax: 650-813-6860
EMail: rherriot@pahv.xerox.com
Sylvan Butler
Hewlett-Packard
11311 Chinden Blvd.
Boise, ID 83714
Phone: 208-396-6000
Fax: 208-396-3457
EMail: sbutler@boi.hp.com
Herriot, et al. Experimental [Page 22]
RFC 2565 IPP/1.0: Encoding and Transport April 1999
Paul Moore
Microsoft
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98053
Phone: 425-936-0908
Fax: 425-93MS-FAX
EMail: paulmo@microsoft.com
Randy Turner
Sharp Laboratories
5750 NW Pacific Rim Blvd
Camas, WA 98607
Phone: 360-817-8456
Fax: 360-817-8436
EMail: rturner@sharplabs.com
IPP Mailing List: ipp@pwg.org
IPP Mailing List Subscription: ipp-request@pwg.org
IPP Web Page: http://www.pwg.org/ipp/
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码
Ctrl + C
搜索代码
Ctrl + F
全屏模式
F11
切换主题
Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键
?
增大字号
Ctrl + =
减小字号
Ctrl + -