Re: minimum-cache time?+

Dancer wrote:
>
[...]
>Caches by their very nature are designed to save us bandwidth. Until we
>established a functional caching system we were about ready to limit
>connectivity. Network prices aren't cheap in our neck of the woods, and
>the way things are going, those prices are going to go up, rather than
>down. (politics *sigh*)
>
Indeed. Same here... ;_; [deep sigh]

>Fact is, all of us, at some point or another are going to _really_ need
>some method of breaking those protocols in the cleanest way possible,
>and usually because someone else did it first. We're using caches to
>save bandwidth, the HTTP/1.1 protocol (particularly) is designed to help
>us get the maximum benefit from our caches, but then again (like most
>things) it can be used improperly to everyone's detriment.
>
Yup, a tool like Squid needs options to circumvent the stupidity or
ill behaviour of others, so that it can do it's job.

Mata ne,

<CB>

-- 
  // <CB> aka Christian Balzer, Tannenstr. 23c, D-64342 Seeheim, Germany
\X/  CB@brewhq.swb.de | Voice: +49 6257 83036, Fax/Data: +49 6257 83037
SWB  - The Software Brewery - | Team H, Germany HQ | Anime no Otaku