2 downloads max?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frederic Dazet
  • Start date Start date
F

Frederic Dazet

hello,

when downloading files with microsft internet explorer, it can only download
a max of 2 files simultaneously from a same site.
this does happen with netscape.
is it possible to tweak the settings of my internet explorer to remove
that 2-file download limit / site?

thanks
fred
 
"Frederic Dazet" said in
hello,

when downloading files with microsft internet explorer, it can only
download a max of 2 files simultaneously from a same site.
this does happen with netscape.
is it possible to tweak the settings of my internet explorer to remove
that 2-file download limit / site?

thanks
fred

Read Microsoft's KB article # 282402. Note that Microsoft is complying with
RFC 2068 that recommends 2 concurrent downloads max. Netscape is a
violator.

RFC 2068
Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc2068.html
8.1.4 Practical Considerations
"Clients that use persistent connections SHOULD limit the number of
simultaneous connections that they maintain to a given server. A single-user
client SHOULD maintain AT MOST 2 connections with any server or proxy."

Notice the RFC says "should". It does demand it as required. As such, the
limit of 2 concurrent persistent connections is a recommendation only.

A server can check how many concurrent connections there are from the same
IP address. So you may find the server itself will limit the number of
concurrent connections that you may have to it, and it may even take
punitive action if you have agreed to terms of service for an account on
that server. So some folks take the attitude that they will not behave
unless forced to by the server; i.e., it is the server's responsibility to
determine how many concurrent connections are allowed from the same IP
address. Actually, servers that do limit the number of concurrent
connections have done so to save their butt so there is enough resources to
fulfill requests from other users rather than letting one user usurp the
entire server as their own.




--
 
Back
Top