some proxies post and some won't with lwp

[Robert]

Hi,
I have a problem posting through proxies that only happens about half
the time, using different proxies.
Can somebody tell me what would cause some proxies to post just fine
and some to spit back this? Thanks in advance.


Code: 411
Message: Length Required

Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:25:01 GMT
Server: squid/2.5.STABLE3-20030721
Content-Length: 1557
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Expires: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:25:01 GMT
Client-Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:36:35 GMT
Client-Response-Num: 1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Proxy-Connection: close
Title: ERROR: The requested URL could not be retrieved
X-Cache: MISS from proxy.ecopy.com.ph
X-Squid-Error: ERR_INVALID_REQ 0

 

[Gregory Toomey]

Hi,
I have a problem posting through proxies that only happens about half
the time, using different proxies.

Havent got a clue. Try a newsgroup that deals with proxies. I only
understand Perl.

gtoomey

 

[Robert]

Then maybe you can tell me if there's a way with perl that i can solve this problem?

 

[Gregory Toomey]

It was a dark and stormy night, and Robert managed to scribble:

Then maybe you can tell me if there's a way with perl that i can solve
this problem?

1. If you ask a question in a Perl newsgroup, make sure it relates to Perl. The question you asked didn't have anything to do with Perl.

2. Many Perl programmers don't use cgi at all. I didn't have a clue what you were talking about, and I have been programming cgi for 8 years.

gtoomey

 

[Robert]

my bad for not researching more. The official RFC 2616 says the
following: "The server refuses to accept the request without a defined
Content-Length. The client MAY repeat the request if it adds a valid
Content-Length header field containing the length of the message-body
in the request message."

So I added this:
$request->header('content-length' => $content_length);



-----------

Gregory

1. I DID ask a question about Perl, (ahem... see above Perl solution).
2. Obviously years programming don't account for knowledge. It shows
great arrogance and greater ignorance claiming to know it all.
3. I didn't ask for what many Perl programmers use. Especially one
that can't anwser my question.
4. If you want to flame people for wanting answers, maybe you should
understand the questions?

 

[Anno Siegel]

my bad for not researching more. The official RFC 2616 says the
following: "The server refuses to accept the request without a defined
Content-Length. The client MAY repeat the request if it adds a valid
Content-Length header field containing the length of the message-body
in the request message."

So I added this:
$request->header('content-length' => $content_length);



-----------

Gregory

1. I DID ask a question about Perl, (ahem... see above Perl solution).

No, you didn't. The solution (supposing it is a solution) was finding
the pertinent part of the RFC. That it can be implemented in Perl doesn't
make it a "Perl solution", or the problem a Perl problem.

2. Obviously years programming don't account for knowledge. It shows
great arrogance and greater ignorance claiming to know it all.

Where is the claim to "know it all"? Gregory stated his ignorance of CGI,
despite many years of Perl programming. Looks like realistic self-assessment,
not arrogance.

3. I didn't ask for what many Perl programmers use. Especially one
that can't anwser my question.

You post, we comment. You don't get to tell people what aspect of your
posting they comment on. Your dismissal of everyone who can't answer
your precious question -- on a group that doesn't talk about your type
of problem -- is the real arrogance displayed in this thread.

4. If you want to flame people for wanting answers, maybe you should
understand the questions?

Not required. You don't have to understand a CGI question to know it's
off topic.

And you weren't flamed for wanting answers, you are flamed because you
insist in asking the wrong people.

[TOFU snipped]

Anno