W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > January to February 1997

Re: Persistent connections: current implementations?

From: Drazen Kacar <Drazen.Kacar@public.srce.hr>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 22:36:05 +0100 (MET)
Message-Id: <199701292136.WAA25790@jagor.srce.hr>
To: akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us (Alexei Kosut)
Cc: kryee@wheat.uwaterloo.ca, www-talk@www10.w3.org
Alexei Kosut wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
> > If anyone on this list knows about clients and/or servers which
> > currently support persistent connections, could you let me know?
> > Do they all use the "Connection: Keep-Alive" header to indicate
> > that a connection should be held open?
> Apache 1.1 and later support persistent connections with Connection:
> Keep-Alive for any document that would return with a Content-length
> header.

So does phttpd for regular files. I don't know which version was the 
first one. It won't keep the connection open if it calls CGI program,
even if the CGI sends Content-Length. You can't trust those things. :)

> As far as I'm aware, current versions of Netscape Navigator and MSIE
> (to name two popular web browsers) both support persistent connections
> with the Keep-Alive methods.

Netscape 2.0 has a nasty bug in handling keep-alive connections. It will
probably receive the HTML page and then just hang while trying to receive
the images. Apache (don't know which version) can be told not to use
Keep-Alive connections with particular client.

Note that MSIE 3.0x sends "Mozilla/2.0" in user-agent header and blocking
NSN 2.0 would also block MSIE 3.0x which does not have that bug, as far as
I know. But... Microsoft asked for it. :)

They work 24 hours a day and 256 days a year  --  root@fly.cc.fer.hr

Received on Wednesday, 29 January 1997 16:38:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 20 January 2020 16:08:21 UTC