On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
One thing that might break (but that Wget doesn't yet support anyway) is
NTLM, which seems to authorize the *connections* individual connections.
Yes it does. It certainly makes things more complicated, as you would have to
exclude such a connection
Daniel Stenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes it does. It certainly makes things more complicated, as you
would have to exclude such a connection from the checks (at least I
think you want that, I don't think you'll be forced to do so). And
you also need to exclude HTTPS-connections from this
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
I'm already treating SSL and non-SSL connections as incompatible. But I'm
curious as to why you say name-based virtual hosting isn't possible over
SSL?
To quote the Apache docs: Name-based virtual hosting cannot be used with SSL
secure servers
Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
Assume that Wget has retrieved a document from the host A, which
hasn't closed the connection in accordance with Wget's keep-alive
request.
Then Wget needs to connect to host B, which is really the same as A
because the provider uses DNS-based virtual hosts. Is it OK
Tony Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's possible that the server responding to the IP address forwards
connections to multiple backend servers. These backend servers may
or may not know about all the resources that the gateway server know
about.
That is precisely the case I'm worried
Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
The thing is, I don't want to bloat Wget with obscure options to turn
off even more obscure (and *very* rarely needed) optimizations. Wget
has enough command-line options as it is. If there are cases where
the optimization doesn't work, I'd rather omit it completely.
Tony Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
The thing is, I don't want to bloat Wget with obscure options to turn
off even more obscure (and *very* rarely needed) optimizations. Wget
has enough command-line options as it is. If there are cases where
the optimization doesn't
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
So if I have the connection to the endpoint, I should be able to reuse it.
But on the other hand, a server might decide to connect a file descriptor to
a handler for a specific virtual host, which would be unable to serve
anything else. FWIW, it works
Daniel Stenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
So if I have the connection to the endpoint, I should be able to
reuse it. But on the other hand, a server might decide to connect
a file descriptor to a handler for a specific virtual host, which
would be
