Quick Capabilities field question.

[Urban Widmark]

On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Christopher R. Hertel wrote:

> The server sends its Capabilities data in the NegProt respoinse, and then 
> the client replies with its Capabilities in the SESSION_SETUP_ANDX.  The 
> two values are ANDed... and the result is the agreed upon behavior.
> 
> Is that close?

Yes, "agreed upon behavior" is perhaps too strong. I don't see anything
that says that either party promises to only use CAP_X.


> I'm trying, in particular, to see how NT 32-bit Status codes are
> negotiated.

If both say CAP_STATUS32 what I have seen is that then it will be used.
But nothing forces the server to actually send such error codes, it can
still "legally" return dos error codes if it wants to by not setting bit
14 in the flags2 field of each request.

The same goes for unicode support. Even if both say they support it, each
message is flagged if it uses ascii or unicode strings.

If only the server says CAP_UNICODE I suppose a client could send unicode
strings and hope to get ascii responses. But servers seem to look closer
at the flags2 than the negotiated bits, so I suspect it won't ...

/Urban