Just to supply a bit more info, this was generated by a servlet that was
running under Jrun. That is a product that provides servlet capability to
web servers that don't yet support servlets. I will report this to the Jrun
folks when I am done testing the patch.
Denis
At 01:59 PM 2/3/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>On Wed, 3 Feb 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> It would be nice to have some exception-handling so that errors like
>> this are caught, logged, and skipped, rather than causing the whole
>> system to stop. Perhaps you could do some kind of reality check
>
>The date section is perhaps the only area that could cause such problems
>since the date must be passed to system functions for further parsing. I
>use the past tense since Gilles's patch is around what I would suggest
>and is very flexible.
>
>Why were there problems before? Well as I mentioned in my e-mail, there's
>a pretty solid standard that almost all servers follow. To be quite
>honest, it's only in the last month or two that I've seen reports of
>servers sending invalid date headers.
>
>The only problem we might run into is if some server *really* breaks the
>standard and sends us dates in a really weird format like 02/03/99
>1:58:03 PM EST. Should we try to match every possible date format?
>
>-Geoff Hutchison
>Williams Students Online
>http://wso.williams.edu/
>
>------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from the htdig mailing list, send a message to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the single word "unsubscribe" in
>the SUBJECT of the message.
>
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the single word "unsubscribe" in
the SUBJECT of the message.
