RE: Millennium standards compliance and firewalls

["Byron C. Mayes" <bcmayes at temple dot edu>]

Way back on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 11:18 AM Steve Waage wrote:

|IUGs,
|We are having problems with Millennium client connections that have to run
|through firewalls upgraded to the latest software/firmware available.  
|The following is an example of an exchange I recently had with an IT
director 
|after he and his firewall vendor did some packet dumping on Millennium
traffic.  
 ...
|the initial exchange. We submitted all of this to [FIREWALL 
|VENDOR] over a period of time and Here is the response from 
|the engineering department: 
|
|Returned call to customer asked him to call me. I briefly 
|explained the reason for us dropping packets. Packet traces 
|show that the application is not rfc1945 and rfc2616 
|compliant. According to the RFCs HTTP client should send 
|packet where GET line ends with 0D 0A (CRLF): 47 45 54 20 2F 
|49 4E 49 54 41 50 50 GET /INITAPP 20 48 54 54 50 2F 31 2E 30 
|0D 0A HTTP/1.0... But this client sends packet where GET line 
|ends with 0A 0A 0A (CRCRCR) instead of 0D 0A (CRLF): 47 45 54 
|20 2F 49 4E 49 54 41 50 50 GET /INITAPP 20 48 54 54 50 2F 31 
|2E 30 0A 0A 0A HTTP/1.0... 

Beginning at the word, "Packet," this is word for word and CHARACTER FOR
CHARACTER the response our user in Italy got from the folks at sonicwall,
their firewall vendor. Even the ellipses are there. 

This brings two questions to mind:

1) Is anyone having any sort of problem with Millennium clients running
through firewalls from any vendor?

2) Is anyone running Millennium clients from behind sonicwall firewalls NOT
experiencing problems?

Private answers are fine if you've got them.

Thanks,
Byron

-- 
 Byron C. Mayes, MLS
 Head, Library Systems & Technology
 Temple University * Philadelphia, PA
 ByronC dot Mayes at temple dot edu
 Listowner, BLACK-IP: The Black Information Professionals' Network
 Join at <http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/black-ip.html>