![]() | ||
![]() | ||
| You are visitor #411430. | ||
| Weblog Archive | About Me | About This Site |
| BannerFilter | Open Source | Frogbot |
| Fish Banner | Cannons and Castles | Tic-Tac-Toe |
| Articles | Recipes | Files |
| “In a world without walls or fences, who needs Windows and
Gates?” - Dino Esposito | ||
![]() | ||
![]() | ||
| You are visitor #411430. | ||
| Weblog Archive | About Me | About This Site |
| BannerFilter | Open Source | Frogbot |
| Fish Banner | Cannons and Castles | Tic-Tac-Toe |
| Articles | Recipes | Files |
| “In a world without walls or fences, who needs Windows and
Gates?” - Dino Esposito | ||
This week I muddled my way through the documentation for the new Barracuda 4.x API, and I was reminded of something I saw on Slashdot awhile back:
“XML is like violence: if it doesn't solve your problem, use more.”
Yes, instead of sending your query as key/value pairs the way a standard HTML form would work (which is how the Barracuda 3.x API worked), the new API takes queries in the form of XML data, much like Microsoft's autodiscover protocol which only ever passes a single value as an argument, but needs it to be wrapped in XML anyway.
This wouldn't annoy me so much, but Barracuda's documentation fails to
show how to actually do a query using the Perl module that they themselves
recommend. That's right, the documentation suggests using CPAN's
XML::RPC, then never mentions anything about it again.
Instead they give examples that use incomplete, truncated XML listings.
But at least I can get a list of domains, which I couldn't find a way to do with the 3.x API.
I've been doing some further experimentation with autodiscovery. First of all, while Apple supports autodiscovery for Exchange 2007 servers, they officially do not support it for POP3/IMAP servers. I've filed a bug report for a feature request, asking them to fix that.
I've also filed a bug report with Mozilla, but they seem opposed to the idea of adding support to Thunderbird. In some ways, I can understand why - they don't want Microsoft's autodiscovery protocol to become popular, because the protocol sucks; they want to design a better system and get everybody to support that instead. Of course this better system doesn't actually exist yet, and support for Microsoft's protocol could be added now, but if nobody wants to do it, it's not going to happen.
Microsoft has this great tool for troubleshooting autodiscovery issues: the Microsoft Exchange Server Remote Connectivity Analyzer. Unfortunately I've found not just one but four bugs in their autodiscovery implementation so far; clearly their test site doesn't share any actual code with Outlook, they just wrote a client implementation from scratch according to their understanding of the spec, and... they didn't do a very good job. I've reported the following bugs to Microsoft:
/Autodiscover/Autodiscover.xml,
which doesn't matter on IIS but breaks if you're using a server that enforces case
sensitivity. Either the spec should say that these paths must be case-insensitive,
or the implementation should match the spec and use lower-case paths.<Action>redirectUrl</Action> or use a standard HTTP
redirect, but the test site thinks getting an XML file with HTTP status 200 is an
error.I wonder if they'll bother to fix these...
You need to watch this. Keith Olbermann explains why we absolutely have to fix health care in this country, and what that really means. Please pass this around; people need to see it.
You can send me e-mail at
contact@phroggy.com
or use this form:
![]() |
This site has been rated among the bottom 95% of all Web sites by Pointless Communications ® |



MADE WITH
MOOF! IN
MIND.
![[Dogcow]](/graphics/moof-1-inv.gif)

