Then use Shutdown(2);
Easy to do a testcase for Eric I think. His proposition to use Close() is
not good, CloseDelayed should give a little better but not on a LAN.
I see
The problem is that I can´t wait, because actually this is can be even done
on classes destructors such as:
procedure TMy
Then use Shutdown(2);
Easy to do a testcase for Eric I think. His proposition to use Close() is
not good, CloseDelayed should give a little better but not on a LAN.
--
mvg, Wilfried
http://www.mestdagh.biz
http://www.comfortsoftware.be
http://www.expertsoftware.be
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Fastream Technologies wrote:
> Arno,
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 17:56, Arno Garrels
> wrote:
>
>> Fastream Technologies wrote:
What is the problem? Please be more specific.
>>>
>>> Honestly I am not yet sure. It is just one customer says "he could
>>> not get SAN SSL cert to work". I t
Arno,
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 17:56, Arno Garrels wrote:
> Fastream Technologies wrote:
> >> What is the problem? Please be more specific.
> >>
> >
> > Honestly I am not yet sure. It is just one customer says "he could
> > not get SAN SSL cert to work". I told him to alter Accepted Hosts and
> > u
Wilfried Mestdagh wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
>> Socket.Send(@Data[0], Length(Data));
>> Socket.Close;
>
> I think this is better:
>
>> Socket.Send(@Data[0], Length(Data));
>> Socket.Shutdown(1);
This can be dangerous, Shutdown(1) disables sends on the socket,
if not all has been sent yet you'll get a
Fastream Technologies wrote:
>> What is the problem? Please be more specific.
>>
>
> Honestly I am not yet sure. It is just one customer says "he could
> not get SAN SSL cert to work". I told him to alter Accepted Hosts and
> use the wildcard SNI domain. I asked here to learn if it is supported
>
Hi Eric,
> Socket.Send(@Data[0], Length(Data));
> Socket.Close;
I think this is better:
> Socket.Send(@Data[0], Length(Data));
> Socket.Shutdown(1);
This will send all data, telling the other end to signal to close when
received. There is in your case no need to call the Flush method.
--
mvg,
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 16:43, Arno Garrels wrote:
> Fastream Technologies wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I wonder how should we support SAN (Subject Alternative Name)
> > certificates with ICS? These are certificates with multi domains. Are
> > they implicitly supported?
>
> What is the problem? Plea
Fastream Technologies wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wonder how should we support SAN (Subject Alternative Name)
> certificates with ICS? These are certificates with multi domains. Are
> they implicitly supported?
What is the problem? Please be more specific.
--
Arno Garrels
--
To unsubscribe or change
If the reason that you call the Flush method is because you want to be
sure
all is sent before closing the socket then you can better call ShutDown(1)
method.
Yes, thats it, it is something like this
Socket.Send(@Data[0], Length(Data));
Socket.Close;
But I have found that if my data is small
Hi Arno,
> Why? Do you have arguments?
No, just something I recall, but it is very long time ago so I assume you
are right.
> I agree that Flush generally violates the async paradigm and
> _might cause problems, however removing the call to MessagePump
> should not make a difference.
OK
--
mv
Hello,
I wonder how should we support SAN (Subject Alternative Name) certificates
with ICS? These are certificates with multi domains. Are they implicitly
supported?
Best Regards,
Gorkem Ates
*Fastream Technologies*
*Software IQ: Innovation & Quality*
http://www.fastream.com | http://twitter.com
12 matches
Mail list logo
