On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 10:31:44PM -0600, Scott Bolte wrote:
> Just for the record, I've abandoned the HTTP::Daemon changes
> that supported using two unidirectional pipes. Given what
> I've learned, I believe the HTTP protocol precludes that
> mode.
>
> The problem is reading some types of response messages.
> When using sockets, the server closes the socket after a
> sending a response without a Content-Length field. The
> resulting EOF allows the client to detect that the message
> is complete.
>
> With persistent, unidirectional pipes an EOF is not an
> option. Now it might be possible to rely on a blank line
> to indicate the header is complete. However, I see no way
> to enforce that so I am not going to try.
Doesn't HTTP 1.1 with persistent connections avoid that problem?
> Scott
>
> P.S. Btw, I've switched to Net::Jabber for this IPC
> problem. Thanks to whoever mentioned it, it rocks!
Okay. Thanks for the update.
Tim.
>
>
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:05:02 -0600, Scott Bolte wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:13:01 +0000, Tim Bunce wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now I do agree the HTTP protocol is worth using for managing
> > > > the flow of data. I run HTTP over ssh myself. (I modified
> > > > HTTP::Daemon to use two unidirectional pipes instead of a
> > > > single, bidirectional socket.)
> > >
> > > Has (will) that be included in future releases?
> >
> > Yes. I plan on submitting the changes back after the bits
> > have a chance to dry. I want to advance my current project
> > to the point where I can stress-test the HTTP::Daemon and
> > UserAgent modifications before I submit the changes.
> >
> > I'll subscribe to the libwww mailing list since that seems
> > to be the right forum for posting the changes. If you want
> > a copy of the HTTP code as-is just drop me a line.
> >
> > Scott
>
|
