IPP> review of IPP documents

[Keith Moore]

> Aha the good old POST vs PRINT issue.
> 
> REQUIRING a different port number would be wrong. We dont preclude this
> however (we have tested our implementations with non port 80 IPP agents).


I disagree.  IPP is a different service than vanilla HTTP; there's
nothing wrong with having separate default ports for each,
any more than having different default ports for telnet and whois.


(Nobody's required to prevent the use of port 80; it's just that
IPP needs its own default port assigned to it, and the IPP URI 
needs to default to that port)


I think this is cleaner overall than using a new HTTP method on port 80.


Keith