Re: Odd sockets problem?

["Brad Stone" <brad@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well, I'm sure we're not the only ones doing it "wrong".  I
know I never dove that deep into the RFC, but it's there,
so you can bet your bottom friggin dollar IBM is going use
it (and they are the only ones.. LOL!)

It's sort of like the email splitting thing that the IBM
STMP server does.. it's in the RFC.. but pretty much one
client knows how to put it back together.. (except notes..
LOL!)

The good thing is long ago I made the HOST parm so they
could use whatever they wanted.  So it's easily fixed, but
I will be updating GETURI so that it uses domain:port as
the default.

Now, I know port 80 isn't needed in the HOST parm, but does
that also mean that for SSL you don't need to use 443, or
is that also default for SSL connections?  Maybe it's safer
to just ALWAYS put the port in.  :)


Brad

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:23:21 -0600 (CST)
 Scott Klement <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Brad Stone wrote:
> >
> > For some reason the server required the HOST header to
> be
> > set with a port number in it...
> >
> 
> I'm doing this wrong in HTTPAPI as well, so I'll fix it.
>  Thanks for
> pointing it out!
> 
> --
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit:
> http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the
> archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
> 

Bradley V. Stone
BVS.Tools
www.bvstools.com