Re: Re: problems with the squid-2.5 conn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henrik Nordstrom" <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
To: "Steven Wilton" <swilton@q-net.net.au>
Cc: <squid-dev@squid-cache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 10:56 PM
Subject: Sv: Re: problems with the squid-2.5 conn

> Yes, the Proxy-support header is only relevant when the client is using a
> proxy. Transparent interception is notproxying and should only behave as
> the webserver as that is what it is in the eye of the client.
>
> There is an 'accel' request flag you can use to determine when it is
> appropriate to add the header.

I've made the suggested change, and it looks good now. If proxies are set,
then IE will not get confused with the extra header, and if proxies are not
set the extra headers are not sent.

Do browsers send requests to different servers down the same TCP connection
when proxies are set?

If browsers do exhibit this behaviour, my patch would cause all subsequent
requests on the same TCP session to have the auth, pinned and must_keepalive
flags set. This is not as much of a problem when using intercept caching
(as the same TCP conneciton will be going to the same web server), but I'm
wondering what would happen when proxies are set.

I'm also wondering if your connection pinning work addresses this issue.

regards

Steven
Received on Thu Apr 20 2006 - 05:10:45 MDT