Re: PIC12F629 simulation with MPLAB 5.2
- From: "JosephKK"<quiettechblue@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:32:10 -0700
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 22:22:52 +0100, Nobody <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:20:49 -0700, JosephKK wrote:
There's no reason why HTTP should be any more flaky than FTP. Both handle
resuming a download in exactly the same way, i.e. the client tells the
server to skip the first N bytes of the file.
No. They don't. Do go read up on the protocols.
I don't need to read up on them, I'm already familiar with both protocols.
Http is more like udp.
HTTP uses TCP. If you want to claim that it's "more like" UDP, you'll need
to elaborate.
Ftp is a multifile wrapper around tcp. Big differences.
No idea what you mean by "multifile".
Plenty of implementations with user interfaces allowing/tracking many
files at once, from many directories, as the user requests. Was
around long before the web.
The biggest difference between the two is that FTP uses separate control
and data connections. The control connection persists so long as you are
logged in, and is used to initiate transfers. A separate data connection
is established for each transfer. To resume a download, the client sends a
REST command whose argument is the length of the partial file, causing the
subsequent RETR command to start transferring data from the specified
offset.
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc959/4_FileTransfer.html
Gotta love sockets.
It is the statelessness that makes it inappropriate. Besides it is
HTTP is stateless; there is no persistent connection. The client
opens a connection, and sends a request, and the server returns the data
on the same connection. The request may include a Range: header to
indicate that only a portion of the data should be returned. To resume a
download, the client specifies a range whose starting position is the
length of the partial file.
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.35
not clear that ranges are required. 14.35.1 begins saying that it is
not required of all servers or all clients, but more complete reading
does not support the assertion.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: clockwork timer switch
- Next by Date: Re: Light a bulb without a closed circuit
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: password etc removal
- Next by thread: Low voltage PFC
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
