- From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
- Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 09:24:44 -0400
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- cc: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, "Herriot,\ Robert" <Robert.Herriot@pahv.xerox.com>, ipp <ipp@pwg.org>, HTTP Working Group <http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
> I don't like this example (of using GET for printer status) > without any cache-control headers, and with the presumption > that the entity body is streamed with indefinite pauses. understood. I realized that such headers would be needed when I wrote the example, but am not so intimately familiar with HTTP that I could cite them off the top of my head; and I didn't want to take the time to look them up on a Friday night. sorry. I suspect that few present-day proxies will want to buffer the entire response before relaying it to the client, because buffreing the entire response is now known to a significant and very annoying affect on response time. at any rate, to the extent that we believe that this technique won't work, then to me that is a good reason to abandon the idea of using HTTP for printer notifications. > Also, the URI has a problem: > > /printer/status/job#2343 > > Since '#' is a reserved character for fragment delimiter, and > HTTP URIs don't de-encode the data, this is not a good example. right you are. Keith
Received on Saturday, 14 August 1999 06:31:25 UTC