Subject: IPP> ADM - Implication table in TEXT format

From: Carl-Uno Manros <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:27:18 PDT

All,

To make sure we are not leaving anybody out, here is a text version of the
Table that Roger deBry et al. produced and earlier sent to the DL as an PDF
attachment. Thanks to Roger for this additional version.

Carl-Uno

--

                  IPP - Implications of New Port Number and Scheme

            Assertion:  When we began the IPP work we had general
            agreement that one major objective of our work would be to
            define a protocol that could be quickly deployed in
            customer’s enterprises, using existing infrastructure.  That
            is, we did not want to have IPP deployment depend upon the
            development and widespread deployment by our customers, of a
            new generation of Web servers, proxies, or firewalls.

            The following table attempts to summarize discussion on this
            topic on the IPP distribution list.

            Key: HTTP:80(Post) means HTTP on port 80, using Post
                 HTTP:X(Post) means a new port for IPP, using Post
                 IPP:X-HTTP means a new port for IPP, using IPP as the
                       scheme name, but still using HTTP on the wire
                 IPP:X-IPP means a new port number and scheme, and
                       using the IPP scheme on the wire.
                 HTTP:80(Print) means defining a new HTTP Print method
                      on port 80

            Clients:
                 HTTP:80(Post) - no impact
                 HTTP:X(Post) - no impact
                 IPP:X-HTTP - Minimal impact
                 IPP:X-IPP - Minimal impact
                 HTTP:80(Print) - Minimal impact

            Servers:
                 HTTP:80(Post)- no impact
                 HTTP:X(Post) - no impact, most servers can listen to
                      multiple ports.
                 HTTP:X-HTTP - no impact
                 HTTP:X-IPP - minimal imapct
                 HTTP:80(Post) - Minimal impact - may be some Web
                      servers make this more difficult than others

            Proxies:
                 HTTP:80(Post) - no impact
                 HTTP:X(Post) - no impact
                 IPP:X-HTTP - no impact
                 IPP:X-IPP - breaks existing proxies
                 HTTP:80(Print) - breaks some installed proxies


            Firewalls:
                 HTTP:80(Post) - Can reconfigure to block inbound
                      traffic, based on IP address. May be now way
                      to block outbound traffic.
                 HTTP:X(Post) - Can reconfigure to block inbound traffic
                      based on IP address, or inbound and outbound based
                      on port number
                 IPP:X-HTTP - Can reconfigure to block inbound
                      traffic, based on IP address. May be now way
                      to block outbound traffic
                 IPP:X-IPP - breaks many installed firewalls. At best,
                      firewalls have to be reconfigured.
                 HTTP:80(Print)- Most firewalls do not do method
                      inspection. Breaks some existing firewalls.

Carl-Uno Manros
Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
Email: [email-masked]

---

From: "Rajesh Chawla (cont)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:11:26 -0400

Hi folks,

If the ipp:// format is adopted, does this imply there
will be an ipps:// format for secure transmissions?

Regards,
Rajesh

---

From: Carl-Uno Manros <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:09:26 PDT

>will be an ipps:// format for secure transmissions?

Not according to Keith Moore, who believes that the 
security folks will solve the problem of using the same
port and same scheme...

Carl-Uno
Carl-Uno Manros