On Apr 17, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Micah Cowan wrote: > On 04/17/2012 09:16 AM, Ryan Rawdon wrote: >> Micah took a quick look over the source (or was previously familiar with >> it), and it sounds like there may be checks in place which should have >> prevented this, however I did look to confirm. > > I misread; it first checks if the hostname matches, and if so, decides > it can reuse the current connection; if the hostname doesn't match, > though, it then does further investigation to see whether the underlying > address is the same. The check wasn't to preven this situation, it was > just meant as a sort of shortcut to avoid looking up IP addresses when > the hostname's the same.
Thanks for the clarification, so that part of my original message can be disregarded (the original questions/comments still stand)
