[squid-users] Re: squid problem

Dear George,

Am really sorry that i am bugging you , but i have a great problem here.
the downlinks here are seperate links from seperate providers through
sattelite which are just downlinks ( using the receive only devices)and the
uplinking is done through the common uplink.

I just wana ask is if a request comes to squid and it is not avaliable in
the cache then the squid gets the request from the internet and when it gets
the request ofcourse it is utilizing the bandwidth isn't it ?
how much bandwidth does it utilize.
can you clear my this problem.

   Regards

   Sukhjit Singh
   Network Administrator
   Emmsons Infotech Ltd.
   SCO 13-14-15, Sec 34A,
   Chandigarh-160 022
   (Ph): +91 172 606664
   Mobile 9815228132
   sukhjits@emmtel.com
   http://www.emmtel.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "George Dominguez" <GDominguez@mteliza.com.au>
To: "Sukhjit Singh" <sukhjits@emmtel.com>
Cc: <squid-users@squid-cache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: squid problem

>
> Please email to the list.
>
> What do you mean by downlinks? are you refering to pvn's at your routers,
> or two nics on your squid proxy?
>
> "My cache engine is using the ip from downlink 2 and caching the users on
> downlink 1."
>
> Are your links two different carriers, such as link1 isdn, link2 frame
> relay?
>
> "There is a drastic decrease in the utiliztion of the downlink 1"
> This is where squid is caching, this type of behaviour would be desirable.
>
> "where as the downlink 2 is being chocked."
> if I understand correctly your not caching anything here, therefore all
> traffic is going direct.
>
> All of this is not very clear to me..
>
> Post your question to:<squid-users@squid-cache.org> and someone with more
> understanding can help you.
>
> Regards
> George
>
>
>
>
> "Sukhjit Singh"
> <sukhjits@emmtel. To: "George
Dominguez" <GDominguez@mteliza.com.au>
> com> cc:
> Subject: squid problem
> 20/05/2003 02:57
> PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear George,
>
> kindly help me ,
> Am facing a great problem regarding the squid+wccp.
> Am using squid+wccp in my network, i have to downlinks(downlink 1 and
> downlink 2) (reveive only links) and one (uplink/downlink).
> i have pool of ip broadcasted from these links.
> My cache engine is using the ip from downlink 2 and caching the users on
> downlink 1.
>
> There is a drastic decrease in the utiliztion of the downlink 1 where as
> the
> downlink 2 is being chocked.
>
> Can this be possible that the cache is using the bandwidth of my downlink
> 1
> to cache.
>
> kindly tell me what can be wronge with this.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Sukhjit Singh
> Network Administrator
> Emmsons Infotech Ltd.
> SCO 13-14-15, Sec 34A,
> Chandigarh-160 022
> (Ph): +91 172 606664
> Mobile 9815228132
> sukhjits@emmtel.com
> http://www.emmtel.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Dominguez" <GDominguez@mteliza.com.au>
> To: <squid-users@squid-cache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 10:23 AM
> Subject: [squid-users] understanding cache reports
>
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > My two Linux/Squid servers are working very nicely! Now it's time for
> fine
> > tuning. We run reports (lire) from http://www.logreport.org/ (I
recommend
> > this report if you want to keep your boss happy, give it to him/her in
> > excel format) :-)
> >
> > From the report I see terms such us: TCP_IMS_HIT, TCP_MEM_HIT, etc. Some
> of
> > this terms for cache management I found terminology in squid's
> > documentation ( I have read it all), but for most I don't know what
these
> > terms mean.
> >
> > Is there a website someone can point me to, or a book I could buy.
> >
> > Regards
> > George
> >
> > =====================================================
> > Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If
> > you are not the addressee (or responsible for delivery of the message to
> > the addressee), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In
> such
> > a case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by
> > reply e-mail. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this
message
> > that do not relate to the official business of my employer shall be
> > understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> =====================================================
> Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If
> you are not the addressee (or responsible for delivery of the message to
> the addressee), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In
such
> a case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by
> reply e-mail. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message
> that do not relate to the official business of my employer shall be
> understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.
>
>
>
Received on Tue May 20 2003 - 01:44:54 MDT