W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-lib@w3.org > January to March 2000

Fw: Can you please help me.

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 11:18:13 -0800
Message-ID: <001b01bf6f44$980a14c0$7eb91eac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Desrochers, Gary" <Gary.Desrochers@fmr.com>
Cc: <www-lib@w3.org>
Maybe someone has seen this?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen,
mailto:frystyk@microsoft.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Desrochers, Gary" <Gary.Desrochers@fmr.com>
To: <frystyk@w3.org>
Sent: Friday 04 February, 2000 09:06
Subject: FW: Can you please help me.


> I must have sent it to the wrong person so I decided to send it to
someone
> else.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Desrochers, Gary
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 10:54 AM
> > To: 'jg@w3.org'
> > Subject: Can you please help me.
> >
> > Good Morning,
> >
> > I need some help which has to do with libwww and a FLUSH it does.
> > We have a client application which attaches to a server which is not
using
> > libwww and also does not support real "Gets", but otherwise they say
that
> > their library is 1.0 compliant.
> >
> > The problem with posting to their server is when their server goes
> > down libwww reconnects.  After reconnecting libwww sends a header with
a
> > content length of whatever the Post it is going to try to send again
and
> > then does a  "FLUSH".   I looked at the libwww code and it just seems
to
> > be doing a "Get" to try to get any information which they are still
> > suppose to be sending.
> >
> > (As an aside, this also happens when the Network Object is preemptive.
We
> > had to change our connection logic so it does a non-preemptive instead
of
> > preemptive request.  We had the same FLUSH problem with them.)
> >
> > They say that if we are sending a content length in the header
> > before the Get then they are suppose to go into a read in order to get
the
> > content?  Is content length part of the Get request?  What is going
on?
> > Is the libwww code flawed in this regard?  What is, exactly, a FLUSH?
> >
> > If I am not understandable in any way or I have any problems with
> > the terminology then please spare no expense, tell me so.
> >
> > Can you help?  I got your address from the Web on the libwww page.  If
you
> > know anyone who knows the answer to this problem then can you forward
this
> > to them?
> >
> > Gary F. Desrochers Gary.Desrochers@fmr.com
>
Received on Friday, 4 February 2000 14:18:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 23 April 2007 18:18:35 GMT