Re: Difference between ipp, ipps, http, https CUPS protocols?

[Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

mick crane wrote:
> On 2019-11-14 23:52, Dan Purgert wrote:
>
>>> What is more interesting is why a user thinks that the LPD protocol
>>> gives them something that IPP doesn't.
>> 
>> Who said that LPR/LPD gave people "something" that IPP doesn't?
>
> I'm not really sure about what happens.
> Is it that a CUPS server translates what it receives from client to
> sequence of instructions printer understands ?
> Certain on client
>
> " mytext | lpr "
>
> worked, which could be handy.

Yeah, CUPS does provide hooks for some commands (similarly to how say
postfix or exim provide 'sendmail(tm)').

This entire discourse between Brian and myself started with a question
to the effect of "what will 'we' (presumably 'Dan' and 'Brian') do
if/when CUPS removes PPD support for our old printers?" ( MID
<z1KEa-1MF-5@gated-at.bofh.it> ).  I responded with a crack about LPRng
being the "solution" to continue supporting the old stuff (and, in the
case of 'new stuff' that still supports the old LPR/LPD protocols; why
bother mucking around with changes I don't "need" to make).

I've so far never been a proponent of X over Y (excepting plaintext IPP
over trying to set up SSL/TLS on your printer for IPPS).

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3OnZ8ACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooEXVgf+L0/WzkH4PelYIeCH1MzJ8eXQFnp3A02nN77ZPcsdjUQs6mBUNm/LTIYM
Ze/fpE5ZUG9kKHhsC1J3oPv0n0MW1oJc/k6egc0g8ZJPkPS16OYX8myP0A2UYPVr
1SyuxOd8UoXb4JKCiISmhwcehbx43qxP8hQZtTOzSMU3gpWXbHFKue2Jb8DXSg0L
WqN7x28c3gusx/tlLVZTTALwHaHnzbZNRxUvQoSFppp/wz3Ww1qZTw13iJfoRZFL
3WGoFfU//MWwg+PqjaqvBRpeYMj0Vaeu3bMLH3ov1IEhkszZxhmUVzOIk6cqdJM8
7IpP+LxpXPwYp9thATVSpNABCvL1Qg==
=SrzW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
|_|O|_| 
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281