Scrive DZ-Jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Maurizio Lotauro wrote:
> > Scrive DZ-Jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > 
> >> Fastream Technologies wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you both for your replies. I found the problem myself: IE6 has a
> bug
> >>> that makes it expect a comma before Realm="...".
> >> That's really weird.  Does adding the comma break it on Firefox or 
> >> Opera?  The RFC does not specify that a comma is required, only 
> >> whitespace, and that [param]=[value] is what denotes a parameter.
> > 
> > Comma is used to separate each [param]=[value] pair.
> 
> 
> RFC2617 says that the authentication parameters is a comma-separated 
> list -- that is if there are more than one parameter, they are separated 
> by comma.  In this case, Realm is only *one* parameter.  The comma after 
>   the authentication method token is (or should be) invalid:

I haven't say the opposite :-)

[...]

> And lastly, here's an example provided in section 3.5:

[...]

Unfortunaltely the rfc doesn't mention nor show an example how specify more 
than one challenge in one header.

I'm still on the opinion to write each challenge in a different header. For 
example. what happen if two scheme have omonimous parameter?


Bye, Maurizio.

----------------------------------------------------
This mail has been sent using Alpikom webmail system
http://www.alpikom.it

-- 
To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/twsocket
Visit our website at http://www.overbyte.be

Reply via email to