Search Results

Search found 321 results on 13 pages for 'rfc 1323'.

Page 1/13 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • FreeBSD slow transfers - RFC 1323 scaling issue?

    - by Trey
    I think I may be having an issue with window scaling (RFC 1323) and am hoping that someone can enlighten me on what's going on. Server: FreeBSD 9, apache22, serving a static 100MB zip file. 192.168.18.30 Client: Mac OS X 10.6, Firefox 192.168.17.47 Network: Only a switch between them - the subnet is 192.168.16/22 (In this test, I also have dummynet filtering simulating an 80ms ping time on all IP traffic. I've seen nearly identical traces with a "real" setup, with real internet traffic/latency also) Questions: Does this look normal? Is packet #2 specifying a window size of 65535 and a scale of 512? Is packet #5 then shrinking the window size so it can use the 512 scale and still keep the overall calculated window size near 64K? Why is the window scale so high? Here are the first 6 packets from wireshark. For packets 5 and 6 I've included the details showing the window size and scaling factor being used for the data transfer. Code: No. Time Source Destination Protocol Length Info 108 6.699922 192.168.17.47 192.168.18.30 TCP 78 49190 http [SYN] Seq=0 Win=65535 Len=0 MSS=1460 WS=8 TSval=945617489 TSecr=0 SACK_PERM=1 115 6.781971 192.168.18.30 192.168.17.47 TCP 74 http 49190 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack=1 Win=65535 Len=0 MSS=1460 WS=512 SACK_PERM=1 TSval=2617517338 TSecr=945617489 116 6.782218 192.168.17.47 192.168.18.30 TCP 66 49190 http [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=1 Win=524280 Len=0 TSval=945617490 TSecr=2617517338 117 6.782220 192.168.17.47 192.168.18.30 HTTP 490 GET /utils/speedtest/large.file.zip HTTP/1.1 118 6.867070 192.168.18.30 192.168.17.47 TCP 375 [TCP segment of a reassembled PDU] Details: Transmission Control Protocol, Src Port: http (80), Dst Port: 49190 (49190), Seq: 1, Ack: 425, Len: 309 Source port: http (80) Destination port: 49190 (49190) [Stream index: 4] Sequence number: 1 (relative sequence number) [Next sequence number: 310 (relative sequence number)] Acknowledgement number: 425 (relative ack number) Header length: 32 bytes Flags: 0x018 (PSH, ACK) Window size value: 130 [Calculated window size: 66560] [Window size scaling factor: 512] Checksum: 0xd182 [validation disabled] Options: (12 bytes) No-Operation (NOP) No-Operation (NOP) Timestamps: TSval 2617517423, TSecr 945617490 [SEQ/ACK analysis] TCP segment data (309 bytes) Note: originally posted http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=32552

    Read the article

  • RFC 1918 address on open internet?

    - by longneck
    In trying to diagnose a failover problem with my Cisco ASA 5520 firewalls, I ran a traceroute to www.btfl.com and, much to my surprise, some of the hops came back as RFC 1918 addresses. Just to be clear, this host is not behind my firewall and there is no VPN involved. I have to connect across the open internet to get there. How/why is this possible? asa# traceroute www.btfl.com Tracing the route to 157.56.176.94 1 <redacted> 2 <redacted> 3 <redacted> 4 <redacted> 5 nap-edge-04.inet.qwest.net (67.14.29.170) 0 msec 10 msec 10 msec 6 65.122.166.30 0 msec 0 msec 10 msec 7 207.46.34.23 10 msec 0 msec 10 msec 8 * * * 9 207.46.37.235 30 msec 30 msec 50 msec 10 10.22.112.221 30 msec 10.22.112.219 30 msec 10.22.112.223 30 msec 11 10.175.9.193 30 msec 30 msec 10.175.9.67 30 msec 12 100.94.68.79 40 msec 100.94.70.79 30 msec 100.94.71.73 30 msec 13 100.94.80.39 30 msec 100.94.80.205 40 msec 100.94.80.137 40 msec 14 10.215.80.2 30 msec 10.215.68.16 30 msec 10.175.244.2 30 msec 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * and it does the same thing from my FiOS connection at home: C:\>tracert www.btfl.com Tracing route to www.btfl.com [157.56.176.94] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms myrouter.home [192.168.1.1] 2 8 ms 7 ms 8 ms <redacted> 3 10 ms 13 ms 11 ms <redacted> 4 12 ms 10 ms 10 ms ae2-0.TPA01-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.199.82] 5 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 0.ae4.XL2.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.8.117] 6 14 ms 16 ms 16 ms 0.xe-11-0-0.GW1.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.85.94] 7 19 ms 16 ms 16 ms microsoft-gw.customer.alter.net [63.65.188.170] 8 27 ms 33 ms * ge-5-3-0-0.ash-64cb-1a.ntwk.msn.net [207.46.46.177] 9 * * * Request timed out. 10 44 ms 43 ms 43 ms 207.46.37.235 11 42 ms 41 ms 40 ms 10.22.112.225 12 42 ms 43 ms 43 ms 10.175.9.1 13 42 ms 41 ms 42 ms 100.94.68.79 14 40 ms 40 ms 41 ms 100.94.80.193 15 * * * Request timed out.

    Read the article

  • RFC Repository of programming RFC's with ability to direct-link sections or even lines?

    - by Lasse V. Karlsen
    Forgive me if this is the wrong place to ask this, I feel like the question is slightly off-topic even though it is also about programming. I am inputting todo-tasks for my WebDAV-project into my issue tracker, as I read through the relevant RFC's, and it would be nice to be able to add a link in my issue text directly to the relevant text, instead of just a link to the RFC file with a section number in the issue text, and then I have to use the find function to find it. For instance, a link like this: http://ieft.org/rfc2518.txt#1000 <-- line 1000 http://ieft.org/rfc2518.txt#9.8.3 <-- section 9.8.3 Neither of these two works, since they just post the full text files, so my question is this: Does anyone know of hosted versions of the RFC documents that contains such links?

    Read the article

  • Proggraming a VPN, Authontication stage - RFC not clear enough

    - by John
    I have a custom build of a unix OS. My task: Adding an IPSec to the OS. I am working on Phase I, done sending the first 2 packets. what I am trying to do now is making the Identefication Payload. I've been reading RFC 2409 (Apendix B) which discuss the keying materials (SKEYID, SKEYID_d, SKEYID_a, SKEYID_e and the IV making). Now, I use SHA1 for authontication and thus I use HMAC-SHA1 & my encryption algorithem is AES 256bit. The real problem is that the RFC is not clear enough of what should I do regarding the PRF. It says: "Use of negotiated PRFs may require the PRF output to be expanded due to the PRF feedback mechanism employed by this document." I use SHA1, does it mean I do not negotiate a PRF? In my opinion, AES is the only algorithm that needs expention (a fixed length of 256bit), so, do i need to expand only the SKEYID_e? If you happen to know a clearer, though relible, source then the RFC please post a link. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Future SAP RFC SDK

    - by Elmex
    Is the SAP RFC SDK (wdtfuncs.ocx, wdtlog.ocx respectively Interop.SAPFunctionsOCX.dll, Interop.SAPLogonCtrl.dll) an acceptable / recommended way to connect (Microsoft) applications via RFCs with SAP ? Will there be a support and maintenance of the SDK in the future (especially in ECC 6.0) ? Are there people who use these controls in .NET applications ?

    Read the article

  • RFC quoted-string definition

    - by Jacco
    Hello, In RFCs there are references to quoted-string now I understand that this means a string contained in quotes. However, I'm unable to find the definition of what exactly is a valid quoted string. /"[^"]"/ = a correctly quoted string. /'[^']'/ = is this also a correctly quoted string? In other words, are both ' and " allowed as quotes when an RFC specifies quoted-string? Bonus points: In what document is this specified?

    Read the article

  • How do you comment on an RFC?

    - by Greg Beech
    I have some comments about the OAuth draft RFC (specifically about some errors it contains), but I'm not sure what the accepted way is to make them. There's an email address at the bottom, so do I simply send mail there with the comments, or is there some IETF tool I should know about for tracking comments/issues?

    Read the article

  • Future of the SAP RFC SDK

    - by Elmex
    Is the SAP RFC SDK (wdtfuncs.ocx, wdtlog.ocx respectively Interop.SAPFunctionsOCX.dll, Interop.SAPLogonCtrl.dll) an acceptable / recommended way to connect (Microsoft) applications via RFCs with SAP ? Will there be a support and maintenance of the SDK in the future (especially in ECC 6.0) ? Are there people who use these controls in .NET applications ?

    Read the article

  • Details of RFC 2326 10.12

    - by VSC
    I am using RFC 2326 10.12 and I want to make sure I am correct. The examples confuse me. From what I understand, the header described consists of four bytes. [$][channel#][MSByte of length][LSByte of length]{data...} Is this the common convention?

    Read the article

  • Is quoted-printable enough to make a mail compliant with the line-length-restriction posed in RFC 2822?

    - by Mnementh
    In RFC 2822 (defining E-Mail) is defined, that no line SHOULD be longer than 78 chars (excluding CRLF) and MUST not longer than 998 characters. With quoted-printable longer lines will be broken into more lines, ending each with a '=' until the real linebreak is reached. Conforms a mail to the standard, if it contains lines longer than 78 (or 998) characters but is encoded with quoted-printable? There are arguments, that this isn't compliant, because the receiving mail-client has longer lines after decoding the quoted-printable message.

    Read the article

  • Debugging OWB generated SAP ABAP code executed through RFC

    - by Anil Menon
    Within OWB if you need to execute ABAP code using RFC you will have to use the SAP Function Module RFC_ABAP_INSTALL_AND_RUN. This function module is specified during the creation of the SAP source location. Usually in a Production environment a copy of this function module is used due to security restrictions. When you execute the mapping by using this Function Module you can’t see the actual ABAP code that is passed on to the SAP system. In case you want to take a look at the code that will be executed on the SAP system you need to use a custom Function Module in SAP. The easiest way to do this is to make a copy of the Function Module RFC_ABAP_INSTALL_AND_RUN and call it say Z_TEST_FM. Then edit the code of the Function Module in SAP as below FUNCTION Z_TEST_FM . DATA: BEGIN OF listobj OCCURS 20. INCLUDE STRUCTURE abaplist. DATA: END OF listobj. DATA: begin_of_line(72). DATA: line_end_char(1). DATA: line_length type I. DATA: lin(72). loop at program. append program-line to WRITES. endloop. ENDFUNCTION. Within OWB edit the SAP Location and use Z_TEST_FM as the “Execution Function Module” instead of  RFC_ABAP_INSTALL_AND_RUN. Then register this location. The Mapping you want to debug will have to be deployed. After deployment you can right click the mapping and click on “Start”.   After clicking start the “Input Parameters” screen will be displayed. You can make changes here if you need to. Check that the parameter BACKGROUND is set to “TRUE”. After Clicking “OK” the log for the execution will be displayed. The execution of Mappings will always fail when you use the above function module. Clicking on the icon “I” (information) the ABAP code will be displayed.   The ABAP code displayed is the code that is passed through the Function Module. You can also find the code by going through the log files on the server which hosts the OWB repository. The logs will be located under <OWB_HOME>/owb/log. Patch #12951045 is recommended while using the SAP Connector with OWB 11.2.0.2. For recommended patches for other releases please check with Oracle Support at http://support.oracle.com

    Read the article

  • Why Illegal cookies are send by Browser and received by web servers (rfc 2109, 2965)?

    - by Artyom
    Hello, According to RFC 2109, 2965 cookie's value can be either HTTP token or quoted string, and token can't include non-ASCII characters. Cookie's RFC 2109 and RFC2965 HTTP's RFC 2068 token definition: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2068#page-16 However I had found that Firefox browser (3.0.6) sends cookies with utf-8 string as-is and three web servers I tested (apache2, lighttpd, nginx) pass this string as-is to the application. For example, raw request from browser: $ nc -l -p 8080 GET /hello HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost:8080 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009050519 Firefox/2.0.0.13 (Debian-3.0.6-1) Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: en-us,en;q=0.5 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate Accept-Charset: windows-1255,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Keep-Alive: 300 Connection: keep-alive Cookie: wikipp=1234; wikipp_username=?????? Cache-Control: max-age=0 And raw response of apache, nginx and lighttpd HTTP_COOKIE CGI variable: wikipp=1234; wikipp_username=?????? What do I miss? Can somebody explain me?

    Read the article

  • Is there a common X-Header for RFC 2821 "MAIL FROM"? Should it be DKIM signed?

    - by makerofthings7
    w.r.t. the difference between RFC2821 MAIL From and RFC2822 FROM I'm considering having my MTA add a header specifying what was sent in the MAIL FROM portion of the envelope. The RFC2821 header is used for receiving email bouncebacks, and is the header that is checked in SPF and some SenderID configurations. The goal is to make it easier for diagnostics and debugging by having this low level information in the email header. What is an acceptable name for this SMTP header? Should this header be signed by DKIM? Is there any reason why it shouldn't be signed?

    Read the article

  • How to implement RFC 3393 (Ipdv packet delay varation) in C?

    - by sagar
    Hello , I am building an Ethernet Application in which i will be sending packets from one side and receiving it on the other side. I want to calculate delay in packets at the receiver side as in RFC 3393. So I have to put a timestamps in the packet at the sender side and then take the timestamps at the receiver side as soon as i receive the packet . Subtracting the values i will get the difference in timestamps and then subtracting this value with subsequent difference i will get One way ipdv delay . Both the clocks are not synchronized . So any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • BGP Dual-As support, any RFC?

    - by Saran
    Generally most of routers like cisco and junos allow a router to have dual-As to be configured via a "local-as" command which overrides the global as-number configured in "router bgp ". Also local-as prepending may or may not happen based on configurations; for example "no-prepend" in cisco. Now my question is, is there any RFC which which standardises this Dual-As support?? Which provides guidelines on whether or not to prepend the "local-as" to As-Path attributes in the Bgp updates ?

    Read the article

  • "RFC 2833 RTP Event" Consecutive Events and the E "End" Bit

    - by brian_d
    Hello, I can send out a RFC 2833 dtmf event as outlined at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2833.txt When I do set the E "End" bit, but leave it as 0, I get the following behaviour: If for example keys 7874556332111111145855885#3 were pressed, then ALL events would be sent and show up in a program like wireshark, however only 87456321458585#3 would sound. So the first key (which I figure could be a separate issue) and any repeats of an event (ie 11111) are failing to sound. In section 3.9, figure 2 of the above linked document, they give a 911 example. Here all but the last event have the E bit set. When I set the bit for all numbers, I never get an event to sound. I have thought of a couple possible thing but do not know if they are the reason: 1) figure 2 shows payload types of 96 and 97 sent. I have not nor know how to exactly. In section 3.8, codes 96 and 97 are described as "the dynamic payload types 96 and 97 have been assigned for the redundancy mechanism and the telephone event payload respectively" 2) In section 3.5, "E:", "A sender MAY delay setting the end bit until retransmitting the last packet for a tone, rather than on its first transmission" Does anyone have an idea of how to actually do this? I have also fiddled around with timestamp intervals and the RTP marker. Any help is greatly appreciated. Here is a sample wireshark event capture of the relevant areas: 6590 31.159045000 xx.x.x.xxx --.--.---.-- RTP EVENT Payload type=RTP Event, DTMF Pound # (end) Real-Time Transport Protocol Stream setup by SDP (frame 6225) Setup frame: 6225 Setup Method: SDP 10.. .... = Version: RFC 1889 Version (2) ..0. .... = Padding: False ...0 .... = Extension: False .... 0000 = Contributing source identifiers count: 0 0... .... = Marker: False Payload type: telephone-event (101) Sequence number: 0 Extended sequence number: 65536 Timestamp: 0 Synchronization Source identifier: 0x15f27104 (368210180) RFC 2833 RTP Event Event ID: DTMF Pound # (11) 1... .... = End of Event: True .0.. .... = Reserved: False ..00 0000 = Volume: 0 Event Duration: 2048

    Read the article

  • Which software could I use to setup a 4in6 IP tunnel (RFC 2473) on GNU/Linux

    - by Mildred
    Here is my problem. I have a server A that has two IP addresses. One public IPv4 and one IPv6. Server B has only one IPv6 address. I want to host most of my services on server B (because I have more disk space on it, I can control it better) but I need the IPv4 of the server A. I would like to set up a 4in6 tunnel (RFC 2473) between A and B so that I can transfer the traffic from the IPv4 address in A to B. If needed, I can request another IPv4 address on the server A, but I'd prefer not to. My question is: which software use to do the 4in6 tunnelling? I suppose OpenVPN can do the thing, but is there any implementation of the 4in6 protocol on Linux? A little more challenging: the IPv4 address comes from a venet interface, which cannot be bridged. How could I transfer ownership of this address I don't use on server A to the server B? Thank you

    Read the article

  • ADSL with RFC 2684 Bridging

    - by Axel Isouard
    My new ADSL line is now enabled, I can finally use my Netgear DM111Pv2 to use to the Internet. My ISP has told me a big surprise : I don't need to use a login and a password to connect to the Internet, then I must use the RFC 2684 bridging mode. It works pretty fine on the ADSL modem's side, but I've spent one night trying to figure out how to connect to the Internet through this modem. I only have a Fonera 2.0n and a computer running Gentoo Linux. I've been trying to use the br2684ctl utility with brctl on my Gentoo, first I've configured my kernel in that way : CONFIG_PPP=y CONFIG_PPP_BSDCOMP=y CONFIG_PPP_DEFLATE=y # CONFIG_PPP_FILTER is not set CONFIG_PPP_MPPE=y # CONFIG_PPP_MULTILINK is not set CONFIG_PPPOATM=y CONFIG_PPPOE=y CONFIG_PPP_ASYNC=y CONFIG_PPP_SYNC_TTY=y [...] CONFIG_ATM=y CONFIG_ATM_CLIP=y CONFIG_ATM_CLIP_NO_ICMP=y CONFIG_ATM_LANE=y CONFIG_ATM_MPOA=y CONFIG_ATM_BR2684=y # CONFIG_ATM_BR2684_IPFILTER is not set And I still get these messages : cirus nais # br2684ctl -b -c 0 -e 0 -a 8.35 br2684ctl[8041]: Interface "nas0" created sucessfully br2684ctl[8041]: Communicating over ATM 0.8.35, encapsulation: LLC br2684ctl[8041]: Fatal: failed to connect on socket; No such device The brctl utility keeps telling me "Invalid argument" each time I try to add the nas0 interface into my bridge, I'm honestly hoping I'm doing wrong. I've been following this README carefully and this tutorial on setting up a PPPoE connection with Gentoo, but the PPPoE interface just tries to start, and nothing special related to PPP happens, I can't see the interface when I do ifconfig. So, I'm asking you if there's something huge I've been missing since the beginning ! Maybe I should wait to buy a new router fully supporting the RFC2684 bridging mode, but I'm more interested in setting up this mode on my Fonera 2.0n and even my Raspberry Pi !

    Read the article

  • What does this SAP error mean? recv104 NiIReadrecv nixxi.cp5087

    - by Techboy
    I have an SAP BI Portal system and an SAP BW system. In the Visual Administrator of the BI Portal, section 'JCo RFC Provider' I have created some RFC listeners. In the SAP BW system (in transaction SM59), I have created, tested and activated the relevant RFC connections. When I start a JCo RFC Provider in the BI Portal the BW system that it communicates with produces these errors (displayed from SAP transaction SM21): Operating system call recv failed (error no. 104 ) Module nam Line Error text Caller.... Reason/cal nixxi.cp 5087 recv104 NiIRead recv Documentation for system log message Q0 I : The specified operating system call was returned with an error. For communication calls (receive, send, etc) often the cause of errors are network problems. It could also be a configuration problem at operating system level. (file cannot be opened, no space in the file system etc.). Additional specifications for error number 104 Name for errno number E_UNKNOWN_NO The meaning of the value stored in 'errno' is platform-dependent. The value which occurred here is unknown to the SysLog system. Either there is an incorrect error number in the SysLog message, or the tables TSLE2 or TSLE3 are not completely maintained. Technical details File Offset RecFm System log type Grp N variable message data 6 410220 m Error (Function,Module,Row) Q0 I recv104 NiIReadrecv nixxi.cp5087 There is plenty of space left in the file system, the servers can ping each other and there is no firewall between the servers. The tables (TSLE2 or TSLE3) mentioned in the error message do not provide any additional information. Please can you tell me if this error message refers to something specific, or if it is generic: recv104 NiIReadrecv nixxi.cp5087

    Read the article

  • Parsing RFC 2822 date in JAVA

    - by DutrowLLC
    I need to parse an RFC 2822 string representation of a date in Java. An example string is here: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 11:29:05 -0800 It looks pretty nasty so I wanted to make sure I was doing everything right and would run into weird problems later with the date being interpreted wrong either through AM-PM/Military time problems, UTC time problems, problems I don't anticipate, etc... Thanks!

    Read the article

  • handling filename* parameters with spaces via RFC 5987 results in '+' in filenames

    - by Peter Friend
    I have some legacy code I am dealing with (so no I can't just use a URL with an encoded filename component) that allows a user to download a file from our website. Since our filenames are often in many different languages they are all stored as UTF-8. I wrote some code to handle the RFC5987 conversion to a proper filename* parameter. This works great until I have a filename with non-ascii characters and spaces. Per RFC, the space character is not part of attr_char so it gets encoded as %20. I have new versions of Chrome as well as Firefox and they are all converting to %20 to + on download. I have tried not encoding the space and putting the encoded filename in quotes and get the same result. I have sniffed the response coming from the server to verify that the servlet container wasn't mucking with my headers and they look correct to me. The RFC even has examples that contain %20. Am I missing something, or do all of these browsers have a bug related to this? Many thanks in advance. The code I use to encode the filename is below. Peter public static boolean bcsrch(final char[] chars, final char c) { final int len = chars.length; int base = 0; int last = len - 1; /* Last element in table */ int p; while (last >= base) { p = base + ((last - base) >> 1); if (c == chars[p]) return true; /* Key found */ else if (c < chars[p]) last = p - 1; else base = p + 1; } return false; /* Key not found */ } public static String rfc5987_encode(final String s) { final int len = s.length(); final StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(len << 1); final char[] digits = {'0','1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9','A','B','C','D','E','F'}; final char[] attr_char = {'!','#','$','&','\'','+','-','.','0','1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9','A','B','C','D','E','F','G','H','I','J','K','L','M','N','O','P','Q','R','S','T','U','V','W','X','Y','Z','^','_','a','b','c','d','e','f','g','h','i','j','k','l','m','n','o','p','q','r','s','t','u','v','w','x','y','z','|', '~'}; for (int i = 0; i < len; ++i) { final char c = s.charAt(i); if (bcsrch(attr_char, c)) sb.append(c); else { final char[] encoded = {'%', 0, 0}; encoded[1] = digits[0x0f & (c >>> 4)]; encoded[2] = digits[c & 0x0f]; sb.append(encoded); } } return sb.toString(); } Update Here is a screen shot of the download dialog I get for a file with Chinese characters with spaces as mentioned in my comment.

    Read the article

  • How to have an iCalendar (RFC 2445) repeat YEARLY with duration

    - by Todd Brooks
    I have been unsuccessful in formulating a RRULE that would allow an event as shown below: Repeats YEARLY, from first Sunday of April to last day of May, occuring on Monday, Wednesday and Friday, until forever. FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=4;BYDAY=SU (gives me the first Sunday of April repeating yearly) and FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=5;BYMONTHDAY=-1 (gives me the last day of May repeating yearly) But I can't figure out how to have the event repeat yearly between those dates for Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Suggestions? Update: Comments don't have enough space to respond to Chris' answer, so I am editing the question with further information. Unfortunately, no. I don't know if it is the DDay.iCal library I'm using, or what, but that doesn't work either. I've found that the date start can't be an ordinal date (first Sunday, etc.)..it has to be a specific date, which makes it difficult for my requirements. Even using multiple RRULE's it doesn't seem to work: BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//DDay.iCal//NONSGML ddaysoftware.com//EN BEGIN:VEVENT CREATED:20090717T033307Z DTSTAMP:20090717T033307Z DTSTART:20090101T000000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;WKST=SU;BYDAY=MO,WE,FR;BYMONTH=4,5 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;WKST=SU;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=4 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;WKST=SU;BYMONTH=5;BYMONTHDAY=-1 SEQUENCE:0 UID:352ed9d4-04d0-4f06-a094-fab7165e5c74 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR That looks right on the face (I'm even starting the event on 1/1/2009), but when I start testing whether certain days are valid, I get incorrect results. For example, 4/1/2009 12:00:00 AM = True // Should be False 4/6/2009 12:00:00 AM = True 4/7/2009 12:00:00 AM = False 4/8/2009 12:00:00 AM = True 5/1/2009 12:00:00 AM = True 5/2/2009 12:00:00 AM = False 5/29/2009 12:00:00 AM = True 5/31/2009 12:00:00 AM = True // Should be False 6/1/2009 12:00:00 AM = False I'm using Douglas Day's DDay.iCal software, but I don't think it is a bug in that library. I think this might be a limitation in iCalendar (RFC 2445). Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Is there a semi-standard way to associate a URL with an IRC user?

    - by DRMacIver
    I'm in the process of doing some identity consolidation, so I'm providing URLs to me at various locations on the internet. I'm quite active on IRC, so this naturally lead me to wonder whether there was a way to provide a link to my IRC presence. This lead to me finding http://www.w3.org/Addressing/draft-mirashi-url-irc-01.txt which appears to be a draft of an RFC for associating URLs with IRC, which suggests that I would be irc://irc.freenode.net/DRMacIver,isnick Which seems a little on the lame side. Further, this RFC draft has very thoroughly expired (February 28 1997). On the other hand it seems to be implemented in chatzilla at least: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/rt-messaging/chatzilla/irc-urls.html So does anyone know if there's a superseding RFC and/or any other de facto standard for this?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >