Go Back > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Software

Thread Tools
Old 2004-01-13, 07:43   #1
Jan 2004

178 Posts
Default Error 2252 with 23.7

I've been having trouble reporting results to primenet with several prime95 clients that were running version 23.7.1. I noticed another client running 23.4.1 was successfully connecting to primenet, and after back-leveling the 23.7 clients to 23.4, they also connect successfully.

Is anyone else seeing the same problem? A didn't see anything in a brief scan of the forum.

I traced the connect attempt of 23.4 and 23.7. 23.4 sends the following (good) HTTP request:

while 23.7 is sending only:

GET /cgi-bin/pnHttp.exe?ps&32516&.&. HTTP/1.0
with no Host: header in the request.

Any ideas on why 23.7 (also tried 23.8) sends the invalid HTTP request? Systems this is running on are both Win XP SP1 and W2K Pro & Server SP4.

bej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2004-02-08, 23:46   #2
Jan 2004

3·5 Posts

Found the primenet.ini UseFullURL=1 setting in whatsnew.txt and that works for me with prime95 23.7. I never had problems communicating with primenet prior to 23.4 though (which the doc says always used relative urls?). It still looks like the current version of prime95 with no UseFullURL setting should be (but isn't) sending a Host: header in the request.
bej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2004-02-09, 23:11   #3
dsouza123's Avatar
Sep 2002

2·331 Posts

How did you trace it ?
dsouza123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2004-02-10, 01:08   #4
Jan 2004

11112 Posts

I traced it with CommView, a Windows-based network/packet monitor, on the system I'm running Prime95 on. But I just tried it again and noticed something I hadn't noticed before -- when the request is sent, I don't receive any response whatsoever -- not even a TCP ack. That made me suspicious of my (external) firewall -- when I bypass the firewall, the short URL form now works OK.

And I must have been reading the HTTP 1.1 RFC previously also -- HTTP 1.1 requires the Host: header, but HTTP 1.0 doesn't. So since Prime95 claims to be sending an HTTP/1.0 request, it's not an invalid request as I originally thought.

Thanks for forcing me to look at this again.
bej is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2004-02-10, 02:20   #5
P90 years forever!
Prime95's Avatar
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

32·823 Posts

OK you HTTP experts, you just volunteered to help fix prime95!

Prime95 (linux version) has always sent the relative URL. It was that way in the original code from Peter Hunter.
Windows Prime95 started using the same code in version 22.

To make some proxy servers happy, I tried sending full URLs. 99% of users were happy, but someone had a setup where that did not work.

So where do we go from here? Are there more than 3 choices:

1) Full URL.
2) Relative URL.
3) Relative URL with host:

Which should be the default? Should we try one and if we get an error (which errors?) try another?

What else should prime95 be doing?
Prime95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2004-02-10, 06:03   #6
garo's Avatar
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE

32·307 Posts

Here is the relevant snippet from the HTTP1.1 spec.

The Request-URI is a Uniform Resource Identifier (section 3.2) and
   identifies the resource upon which to apply the request.

       Request-URI    = "*" | absoluteURI | abs_path | authority

   The four options for Request-URI are dependent on the nature of the
   request. The asterisk "*" means that the request does not apply to a
   particular resource, but to the server itself, and is only allowed
   when the method used does not necessarily apply to a resource. One
   example would be

       OPTIONS * HTTP/1.1

   The absoluteURI form is REQUIRED when the request is being made to a
   proxy. The proxy is requested to forward the request or service it
   from a valid cache, and return the response.
Option 3, relative URI with host field is the preferred method for contacting web servers but option 1 is REQUIRED for proxies.

Last fiddled with by garo on 2004-02-10 at 06:08
garo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2004-02-10, 12:12   #7
jinydu's Avatar
Dec 2003
Hopefully Near M48

6DE16 Posts

Originally Posted by bej
Any ideas on why 23.7 (also tried 23.8) ...

Version 23.8? I've never heard of it, and couldn't find it at
jinydu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2004-02-10, 15:26   #8
Jan 2003
far from M40

53 Posts

Originally Posted by jinydu
Version 23.8? I've never heard of it, and couldn't find it at
Try . There you'll find statistics, new versions and stuff. E.g.,


S80780 is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ERROR: cudaGetLastError() returned 30: unknown error garo GPU Computing 10 2013-04-27 19:01
Error, hardware causing CRC error's Unregistered Information & Answers 3 2008-05-05 05:40
PrimeNet error 2252 Unregistered PrimeNet 37 2006-11-29 20:36
Error 5 causes userid change and error 17 updates for exponents Old man PrimeNet PrimeNet 0 2006-02-05 02:27
ERROR: Primenet error 2252. Q: which tcp/ip ports are being used for the transfer? nevillednz PrimeNet 15 2004-05-17 23:08

All times are UTC. The time now is 02:43.

Sun Apr 18 02:43:16 UTC 2021 up 9 days, 21:24, 0 users, load averages: 1.68, 1.71, 1.59

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.