> So that's the end of it. It's the server that's causing my troubles...
Good to know.
> Is it worth using different time-out's for different stages of
> connection? Ex: use a long timeout for DNS queryes, use shorter timeout
> for the connection itself, use long timeouts for data transmission it
Francois Piette wrote:
> You should always implement timeout. Altough in your particular case, there
> may be a problem somewhere else.
Good to know! Is there a "magic number" for the default timeout? What
should we use?
Is it worth using different time-out's for different stages of
connection?
CTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 3:13 PM
Subject: [twsocket] Help on ICS's HTTP client component
> Hello everyone.
>
>
> Note:
> This is a re-post of a message sent to the Talk list, with more detail
> on the problem. This message gets sent the second time to t
Hello everyone.
Note:
This is a re-post of a message sent to the Talk list, with more detail
on the problem. This message gets sent the second time to this list too.
I sent the first one before receiving elist's subscription
confirmation so I don't think it went through.
I'm having some trou
