Re: Re: Slightly OT: HTTP protocal documentation?

What do you expect as answer to such a vast question?

Something along the lines of "I read so-and-so's book (link to Fatbrain) and it was right at that practical level." or "there's this module that's designed as a mini-HTTP server for embedded in stand-alone appliances; take a look at that."

In short, I expect what I commonly see from Monks here. Useful, insightful, and thoughful answers of the "teach him to fish" variety.

—John

Comment on Re: Re: Slightly OT: HTTP protocal documentation?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Slightly OT: HTTP protocal documentation? by perrin (Chancellor) on Sep 18, 2001 at 01:31 UTC
Both POE and LWP include mini HTTP servers. However, you're almost certainly better off sticking with mod_perl. You're unlikely to get significantly better performance, and you'll be taking on a lot more work if you build your own. So, if it's just for kicks, read the RFC and have a blast, but if it's a practical project, stick with mod_perl.	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Slightly OT: HTTP protocal documentation? by stefp (Vicar) on Sep 18, 2001 at 01:36 UTC
Sorry for being rude (and inexact) but it is difficult to answer more specifically even by pointers to another source except the RFCs themselves when your question is so vast. I have nothing against "teaching to fish", but I don't think this is the most well chosen medium. More like: you ask specific questions and get specific answers. Better asked first hand. But who I am to argue with a saint. :) -- stefp	[reply]