On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 10:31:44PM -0600, Scott Bolte wrote: > Just for the record, I've abandoned the HTTP::Daemon changes > that supported using two unidirectional pipes. Given what > I've learned, I believe the HTTP protocol precludes that > mode. > > The problem is reading some types of response messages. > When using sockets, the server closes the socket after a > sending a response without a Content-Length field. The > resulting EOF allows the client to detect that the message > is complete. > > With persistent, unidirectional pipes an EOF is not an > option. Now it might be possible to rely on a blank line > to indicate the header is complete. However, I see no way > to enforce that so I am not going to try.
Doesn't HTTP 1.1 with persistent connections avoid that problem? > Scott > > P.S. Btw, I've switched to Net::Jabber for this IPC > problem. Thanks to whoever mentioned it, it rocks! Okay. Thanks for the update. Tim. > > > On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:05:02 -0600, Scott Bolte wrote: > > On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:13:01 +0000, Tim Bunce wrote: > > > > > > > > Now I do agree the HTTP protocol is worth using for managing > > > > the flow of data. I run HTTP over ssh myself. (I modified > > > > HTTP::Daemon to use two unidirectional pipes instead of a > > > > single, bidirectional socket.) > > > > > > Has (will) that be included in future releases? > > > > Yes. I plan on submitting the changes back after the bits > > have a chance to dry. I want to advance my current project > > to the point where I can stress-test the HTTP::Daemon and > > UserAgent modifications before I submit the changes. > > > > I'll subscribe to the libwww mailing list since that seems > > to be the right forum for posting the changes. If you want > > a copy of the HTTP code as-is just drop me a line. > > > > Scott >
