rfc

What is the behavior difference between return-path, reply-to and from?

纵饮孤独 提交于 2019-11-26 16:54:55
On our mailing application we are sending emails with the following header: FROM: marketing@customer.com TO: subscriber1@domain1.com Return-PATH: bouncemgmt@ourcompany.com The problem that we are facing is that some email servers will bounce back a message immediately and use the from or reverse path (marketing@customer.com) instead to our bounce mgmt server. We want to know if we modify in the header the reply-to to be the same as the return-path if we will be able to catch all bounces. Any other ideas are welcome? We are using the following documents as references: VERP RFC Bounce Messages

Data URI scheme and Internet Explorer 9 Errors

被刻印的时光 ゝ 提交于 2019-11-26 14:40:30
I'm having a problem using the RFC 2397 data url scheme with IE versions 6-9. My sample code below works without problem when using current versions of Safari, FF, Opera and Chrome. data:text/html;base64,PG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0icmVmcmVzaCIgY29udGVudD0iMDt1cmw9aHR0cDovL2dvb2dsZS5jb20vIj4g or data:text/html,%3Cmeta%20http-equiv%3D%22refresh%22%20content%3D%220%3Burl%3Dhttp%3A//google.com/%22%3E%20 If the above code is pasted in almost any browser excluding IE it will navigate to google.com, when attempting with IE it fails with the following error. The webpage cannot be displayed Most likely

TCP协议

谁说我不能喝 提交于 2019-11-26 13:58:22
简介 传输控制协议 (英语: T ransmission C ontrol P rotocol,缩写: TCP )是一种面向连接的、可靠的、基于 字节流 的 传输层 通信协议,由 IETF 的 RFC 793 定义。在简化的计算机网络 OSI模型 中,它完成第四层传输层所指定的功能。 用户数据报协议 (UDP)是同一层内另一个重要的传输协议。 在因特网协议族( Internet protocol suite)中,TCP层是位于 IP 层之上, 应用层 之下的中间层。不同主机的应用层之间经常需要可靠的、像 管道 一样的连接,但是IP层不提供这样的流机制,而是提供不可靠的包交换。 应用层向TCP层发送用于网间传输的、用8位字节表示的数据流,然后TCP把数据流分割成适当长度的报文段(通常受该计算机连接的网络的数据链路层的 最大传输单元 (MTU)的限制)。之后TCP把结果包传给IP层,由它来透过网络将包传送给接收端实体的TCP层。TCP为了保证不发生丢包,就给每个包一个序号,同时序号也保证了传送到接收端实体的包的按序接收。然后接收端实体对已成功收到的包发回一个相应的 确认信息 (ACK);如果发送端实体在合理的 往返时延 (RTT)内未收到确认,那么对应的数据包就被假设为 已丢失 并进行重传。TCP用一个 校验和 函数来检验数据是否有错误,在发送和接收时都要计算校验和。 运作方式

Why is form enctype=multipart/form-data required when uploading a file?

旧街凉风 提交于 2019-11-26 12:22:52
Why is <form enctype=multipart/form-data> required when uploading a file to a web-server? It has to do with how the browser packages binary and form data for transmission over HTTP. By default only form data is sent, but if the form needs to support uploading a file, then the binary data must also be appended and separated from the form data. Scott Hanselman gives a good explanation of this here : HTTP and How File Upload works via HTTP It's always better, for me, to understand WHY and HOW something is happening. If you say "just because" or "whatever, you just add that, and it works" then I

What is the behavior difference between return-path, reply-to and from?

谁说我不能喝 提交于 2019-11-26 04:57:48
问题 On our mailing application we are sending emails with the following header: FROM: marketing@customer.com TO: subscriber1@domain1.com Return-PATH: bouncemgmt@ourcompany.com The problem that we are facing is that some email servers will bounce back a message immediately and use the from or reverse path (marketing@customer.com) instead to our bounce mgmt server. We want to know if we modify in the header the reply-to to be the same as the return-path if we will be able to catch all bounces. Any

Data URI scheme and Internet Explorer 9 Errors

回眸只為那壹抹淺笑 提交于 2019-11-26 03:58:28
问题 I\'m having a problem using the RFC 2397 data url scheme with IE versions 6-9. My sample code below works without problem when using current versions of Safari, FF, Opera and Chrome. data:text/html;base64,PG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0icmVmcmVzaCIgY29udGVudD0iMDt1cmw9aHR0cDovL2dvb2dsZS5jb20vIj4g or data:text/html,%3Cmeta%20http-equiv%3D%22refresh%22%20content%3D%220%3Burl%3Dhttp%3A//google.com/%22%3E%20 If the above code is pasted in almost any browser excluding IE it will navigate to google.com,

RegEx to parse or validate Base64 data

风格不统一 提交于 2019-11-26 00:33:23
问题 Is it possible to use a RegEx to validate, or sanitize Base64 data? That\'s the simple question, but the factors that drive this question are what make it difficult. I have a Base64 decoder that can not fully rely on the input data to follow the RFC specs. So, the issues I face are issues like perhaps Base64 data that may not be broken up into 78 (I think it\'s 78, I\'d have to double check the RFC, so don\'t ding me if the exact number is wrong) character lines, or that the lines may not end

TCP协议

旧街凉风 提交于 2019-11-26 00:26:32
概述 传输控制协议 (英语: T ransmission C ontrol P rotocol,缩写: TCP )是一种面向连接的、可靠的、基于 字节流 的 传输层 通信协议,由 IETF 的 RFC 793 定义。在简化的计算机网络 OSI模型 中,它完成第四层传输层所指定的功能。 用户数据报协议 (UDP)是同一层内另一个重要的传输协议。 在因特网协议族( Internet protocol suite)中,TCP层是位于 IP 层之上, 应用层 之下的中间层。不同主机的应用层之间经常需要可靠的、像 管道 一样的连接,但是IP层不提供这样的流机制,而是提供不可靠的包交换。 应用层向TCP层发送用于网间传输的、用8位字节表示的数据流,然后TCP把数据流分割成适当长度的报文段(通常受该计算机连接的网络的数据链路层的 最大传输单元 (MTU)的限制)。之后TCP把结果包传给IP层,由它来透过网络将包传送给接收端实体的TCP层。TCP为了保证不发生丢包,就给每个包一个序号,同时序号也保证了传送到接收端实体的包的按序接收。然后接收端实体对已成功收到的包发回一个相应的 确认信息 (ACK);如果发送端实体在合理的 往返时延 (RTT)内未收到确认,那么对应的数据包就被假设为 已丢失 并进行重传。TCP用一个 校验和 函数来检验数据是否有错误,在发送和接收时都要计算校验和。 简介

HTTP状态码详解

|▌冷眼眸甩不掉的悲伤 提交于 2019-11-25 23:39:16
HTTP状态码详解 通知:1XX 1XX系列响应代码仅在与HTTP服务器沟通时使用。 100 Continue 客户端应当继续发送请求。这个临时响应是用来通知客户端它的部分请求已经被服务器接收,且仍未被拒绝。客户端应当继续发送请求的剩余部分,或者如果请求已经完成,忽略这个响应。服务器必须在请求完成后向客户端发送一个最终响应。 101 Switching Protocols 服务器已经理解了客户端的请求,并将通过Upgrade 消息头通知客户端采用不同的协议来完成这个请求。在发送完这个响应最后的空行后,服务器将会切换到在Upgrade 消息头中定义的那些协议。   只有在切换新的协议更有好处的时候才应该采取类似措施。例如,切换到新的HTTP 版本比旧版本更有优势,或者切换到一个实时且同步的协议以传送利用此类特性的资源。 102 Processing 由WebDAV(RFC 2518)扩展的状态码,代表处理将被继续执行。 成功:2XX 2XX系列响应代码表明操作成功了。 200 OK 请求已成功,请求所希望的响应头或数据体将随此响应返回。 201 Created 请求已经被实现,而且有一个新的资源已经依据请求的需要而建立,且其 URI 已经随Location 头信息返回。假如需要的资源无法及时建立的话,应当返回 '202 Accepted'。 202 Accepted 服务器已接受请求