You are right. If we wait, we are basically falling back to waiting for the server to close the connection in every case. I believe that HttpClient behaves correctly. I have already pursued this with the appropriate HTTP servers :)
-- Ryan Hoegg ISIS Networks Ortwin Glück wrote: > My point of view: > > We should primarily stick to the RFCs. (Yes I know there are other > interest groups who do server testing). If there are servers that have > a faulty HTTP implementation that's their problem (which should be > corrected), not ours. Better write to them :-) > > But the actual problem here is more: How can we determine that the > content-length was reported too small? > > Imagine the following situation: > Server reports content-lenth 1000 bytes. The actual content is 1015 > bytes. After 10 bytes the server pauses (maybe because of network jam) > and after some seconds the remaining 15 bytes arrive. There is > absolutely no reason why the client should wait (for how long?) for > more data after it has received the reported number of bytes. > > So we can not detect this in general, right? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
