Scrive "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm sorry but I'm confused. What caused IE to open a
> new connection? When you say "I confirm", do you
> mean that you submit a username and password when IE
> prompted you?
Consider that English is not my native language (not to mention that I
practically never learned it :)
I use the following html for to do the test:
<form method="post" action="THE_URL_PROVIDED_PRIVATELY" target="_blank">
<INPUT type="SUBMIT" value="Post"><br>
<textarea cols=190 rows=50 name="request">
The steps I made are:
1) I fill the box with lot of data
2) I press the submit button
3) IE open a new window
4) after some seconds IE prompt for username and password
5) I wait one minute or two
6) I write username and password and press the ok button
7) IE works some seconds
8) the result is displayed in the new window
If I do the point 5 then IE use a new connection for the re-send, otherwise it
use the same connection.
> Perhaps the new connection is because of a very short
> nonce time-out?
Most probably yes.
> OK, so it is what we have suspected all along: Both
> browsers receive the early 401 response but continue
> sending the full content, and then re-send the
> request with the authorization headers. The
> difference is that IE prompts the user as soon as it
> receives the response (early), while Firefox waits
> until it finishes transmitting the body (late).
> I think then that Arno's solution would work, since
> it seems to have the same effect: delay the re-try
> until after the body is sent completely.
I'll try a different approach. Stay tuned.
> I agree with you that if this was the concern of
> Tomcat, it would have closed the connection. So why
> does Tomcat respond early?
I'll ask Tomcat people when I discovered the right place.
This mail has been sent using Alpikom webmail system
To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://lists.elists.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twsocket
Visit our website at http://www.overbyte.be