Webserver quality checking programm

Hi Group,
could anyone recommend a good freeware webserver quality checking program?

Thanks.
Michel

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 13:34:58 +0200, "Michel Firholz"
<michel.firholz@web.de> wrote:

>could anyone recommend a good freeware webserver quality checking program?

Maybe - it depends on the exact definition of "webserver quality".
Apache's a quality web server. Do you mean competent HTML code?
Something pleasing to the eye? The phrase can mean all sorts of
things, objective and subjective.

"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
newshbp22drhsquoqhrlr9ssuvul30u2fjq90@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 13:34:58 +0200, "Michel Firholz"
> <michel.firholz@web.de> wrote:
>
>>could anyone recommend a good freeware webserver quality checking program?
>
> Maybe - it depends on the exact definition of "webserver quality".
> Apache's a quality web server.

You are right, let me define it clearly:
I meant a routine, which is periodically monitoring if a web server is
upright and accessible.
Additionally it should monitor the response time to deliver a given page.
Last but not least, it should be able to test if a SSL coded page is
accessible.

> Do you mean competent HTML code?
> Something pleasing to the eye? The phrase can mean all sorts of
> things, objective and subjective.

not really: neither are HTML content is, nor are design considerations or
even broken links to be considered as being "web_server_ quality", but much
more beeing "web_site_ quality".

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 09:23:20 +0200, "Michel Firholz"
<michel.firholz@web.de> wrote:

>You are right, let me define it clearly:
>I meant a routine, which is periodically monitoring if a web server is
>upright and accessible.
>Additionally it should monitor the response time to deliver a given page.
>Last but not least, it should be able to test if a SSL coded page is
>accessible.

A trivial little web control and 2 timers. I could probably do it in
VB in an hour if I took a look at exactly what SSL entailed - I've
never coded for it. But reading your above paragraph roughed out most
of the non-SSL program for me.

Then again, look into tcl - it should be pretty trivial there too. Or
a little Perl script running on your computer.

"Periodically" means kick off a timer every - what? 5 minutes? Wait,
oh, 60 seconds. If no response, the sites not there, otherwise log
the time it took for the return.

Now do the SSL stuff, what ever that will be.

Al Klein skrev:
>> I meant a routine, which is periodically monitoring if a web server is
>> upright and accessible.
>> Additionally it should monitor the response time to deliver a given page.
>> Last but not least, it should be able to test if a SSL coded page is
>> accessible.
>
> A trivial little web control and 2 timers. I could probably do it in
> VB in an hour if I took a look at exactly what SSL entailed - I've
> never coded for it. But reading your above paragraph roughed out most
> of the non-SSL program for me.

No need to reinvent the wheel. A simple script can call a simple
SSL-enabled browser, such as Lynx, and use it to dump a given URL. After
that it's all a matter of timing the response and verifying the contents
of the dump.

On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 13:12:28 +0200, Morten Skarstad
<root@localhost.invalid> wrote:

>Al Klein skrev:
>>> I meant a routine, which is periodically monitoring if a web server is
>>> upright and accessible.
>>> Additionally it should monitor the response time to deliver a given page.
>>> Last but not least, it should be able to test if a SSL coded page is
>>> accessible.

>> A trivial little web control and 2 timers. I could probably do it in
>> VB in an hour if I took a look at exactly what SSL entailed - I've
>> never coded for it. But reading your above paragraph roughed out most
>> of the non-SSL program for me.

>No need to reinvent the wheel. A simple script can call a simple
>SSL-enabled browser, such as Lynx, and use it to dump a given URL. After
>that it's all a matter of timing the response and verifying the contents
>of the dump.

I haven't done any scripting in years, but your trivial is more
trivial than mine.

"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:eapr22hlcm6kls685rt0jidtgh884te93p@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 09:23:20 +0200, "Michel Firholz"
> <michel.firholz@web.de> wrote:
>
>>You are right, let me define it clearly:
>>I meant a routine, which is periodically monitoring if a web server is
>>upright and accessible.
>>Additionally it should monitor the response time to deliver a given page.
>>Last but not least, it should be able to test if a SSL coded page is
>>accessible.
>
> A trivial little web control and 2 timers. I could probably do it in
> VB in an hour if I took a look at exactly what SSL entailed - I've
> never coded for it. But reading your above paragraph roughed out most
> of the non-SSL program for me.
>
> Then again, look into tcl - it should be pretty trivial there too. Or
> a little Perl script running on your computer.
>
> "Periodically" means kick off a timer every - what? 5 minutes? Wait,
> oh, 60 seconds. If no response, the sites not there, otherwise log
> the time it took for the return.
>
> Now do the SSL stuff, what ever that will be.

I wonder. If it were tha trivial, a plugin for Firefox would have existed.

On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 08:38:59 +0200, "Michel Firholz"
<michel.firholz@web.de> wrote:

>I wonder. If it were tha trivial, a plugin for Firefox would have existed.

The original request was a trivial one, so why should the solution be
less trivial? (I mean "trivial" in a systems analysis way, I'm not
denigrating the original request.)