[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       twsocket
Subject:    Re: [twsocket] THttpServer Bad Command warning
From:       "Ian Baker" <ibaker () codecutters ! org>
Date:       2003-10-31 16:57:35
[Download RAW message or body]

----- Original Message ----- 
> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:47:47 +0200
> From: "Fastream Technologies" <fastream@fastream.com>
> Subject: [twsocket] THttpServer Bad Command warning
> To: "ICS support mailing" <twsocket@elists.org>,   "SSL implementation
> for ICS" <ics-ssl@elists.org>
> Message-ID: <000901c39f94$4af39740$9d17aed4@intellica>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1254"
>
> Dear Fellows,
>
> As you know, lately, I have sent an email to the list about the
> non-responsiveness of the ICS HTTP server when a bad HTTP command is sent.
> Just telnet to an ICS web erver demo and then enter garbage characters and
> press enter.
>
> Instead of returning the Bad Command response of the RFC, as Francois
> admitted, it simply quietly keeps on listening. I think this issue is very
> important since HTTP is the foundation of most of the SSL-based projects
> too.

I think it might be useful for you to point that one out in the RFC - IIRC
(and not having looked at the RFC for a while), there is a non-mandatory
recommendation about assuming HTTP 0.9, but nothing about returning an
immediate response on the first non-blank line only. It all comes down to
interpretation.. an RFC number and section number would help.

> Therefore, before we go on with any work, I think the bad response
> issue should be complete first. Otherwise, all ICS web servers are
> RFC-incompatible!

Erm.. I don't use HTTPS in any of my currently active projects.

Who should I ask to get permission to continue development using the
unrelated protocols? ;o)

Regards,

Ian


-- 
To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/twsocket
Visit our website at http://www.overbyte.be
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]