Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
> Hmmm... Possibly SSL requires close_on_recycle. Or, at
> least, using that flag as required for SSL.
> 

I don't have time to explain in more detail, but the more
I look over the old way, it was to maintain some sort
of local state-of-health on the socket pre-and-post
each request... As such, I'm *thinking* that the
code patch should be reverted to maintain that
logic, and extend it, rather than remove it...

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
            "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."

Reply via email to