On May 16, 2012 4:06 PM, "Mark Phippard" <markp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 16, 2012 3:00 PM, "Justin Erenkrantz" <jus...@erenkrantz.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Mark Phippard <markp...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > NOTE the length stuff that happened in the middle of the response? > >> > >> Yah, that'd be a CDATA spanning TCP packets as socat puts in > >> timestamps when a new packet arrives. > >> > >> So, yah, Greg's the most recent culprit in that space. =P -- justin > > > > Eh? How can my client work cause a server to send garbage? > > > > My work will detect the problem, where it likely got ignored before. > > I do not think the server sent garbage. It sent a chunked response > where the entire OPTIONS response did not come in one packet. When > this happens with the new code it seems to break. > > As Justin said, the date/time was simply inserted by socat in its > output because it was a new packet.
Gotch. Likely I goofed something in 1337455. I'll see if I can repro somehow. Thx, -g
