Here's what I found so far trying to use HTTPClient for the monitor. Cons: 1. the current release candidate doesn't have an easy way to set the HTTP headers 2. HTTPClient contains similar objects like Cookie 3. Using HTTPClient would mean refactoring HTTPSampler Pros: 1. HTTPClient supports digest auth and NTLM 2. the API is relatively simple and easy to use 3. it uses raw sockets I haven't performed any benchmarks and not sure it would make much difference. Right now it's not clear to me there's enough advantage. Originally I thought the monitor would have to support digest auth, but it looks like Tomcat's /manager/status servlet doesn't handle digest auth correctly. I wasn't able to get HTTPClient or internet explorer to authenticate against the manager webapp when I set it to "digest". It looks like the current HTTPSampler is sufficient for the monitor, so I'm inclined to just stick with what we have. I like how we handle HTTP headers and don't really feel like patching HTTPClient. peter lin
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online
