socket call does not read full content

Hello Group,

I am implementing a http client and reading the content from the
socket. For MIME type

text/html the socket reads the full Content-Length bytes, however if
the MIME type is
audio/mpeg the socket does not read the whole Content-Length and only
reads some number
of less bytes from the web server.

It causes my program to go in an infinite loop, because I close the
socket when I read full
Content-Length.

Could someone tell me what could be causing this. I tried to debug it
in many ways but
could not come up with a reason.

Need help in figuring out the cause.

Thanks in advance.

nagrik

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> I am implementing a http client and reading the content from the
> socket. For MIME type
>
> text/html the socket reads the full Content-Length bytes,

You were lucky. You will get however many bytes are available at the
time of the read. If the content is split over several frames, you may
not get everything in a single call.

Allen McIntosh wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> > I am implementing a http client and reading the content from the
> > socket. For MIME type
> >
> > text/html the socket reads the full Content-Length bytes,
>
> You were lucky. You will get however many bytes are available at the
> time of the read. If the content is split over several frames, you may
> not get everything in a single call.

Allen,

I am making several calls, till I count all bytes and total is equal to
Content-Length.
However after reading some 21 bytes less, the client does not have
anything to read
although expecting 21 more bytes and thus the client goes in an
infinite loop.

nagrik

(E-Mail Removed) ha scritto:
> I am making several calls, till I count all bytes and total is equal to
> Content-Length.
> However after reading some 21 bytes less, the client does not have
> anything to read
> although expecting 21 more bytes and thus the client goes in an
> infinite loop.

I'd suggest using a packet sniffer (eg: ethereal).
bye.

--
Davide DG.
tieni per te la spam per rispondermi via email.

Davide DG wrote:

> I'd suggest using a packet sniffer (eg: ethereal).

Ethereal is dead ;-)

Spoon wrote:
> Davide DG wrote:
>
>> I'd suggest using a packet sniffer (eg: ethereal).
>
> Ethereal is dead ;-)

I use ethereal, therefore I am dead?

Hey, wait a minute!

poly-p man

Spoon ha scritto:

> Ethereal is dead ;-)

lol, true!
http://www.wireshark.org/
thx for the post
bye.

--
Davide DG.