Re: [squid-users] what the difference b/w htcp / proxy only

> >>Frankly I really don't know if htcp is better then ICP while
> >>configuring

> Elsen Marc wrote:
> > HTCP provides better security and better cache hit predictions
> > versus ICP. However, HTCP messages are larger and more complicated.
> > So they impose slightly more network overhead.

> >>sibling, all we want to achieve "sibling" and yes "proxy-only" would
> >>be the best coz all of the caches servers are on the same
> >>network/switch.
> >>
> >>I thinks there is some sorta lack of communication probably from my
> >>side coz I'm not native ya ;)
> >>
> >>So what you suggest may I use ICP or HTCP protocol while configuring
> >>cache_peer , sibling relationship b/w the cache servers.

> > You need ICP or HTCP to use siblings in a fashionable manner.
> > I.e. the ability for the cache 'client' to ask the sibling
> > whether it has the object or not.
> > Probably ICP will has a slighty more chance for 'false hits'.

On 30.03 16:46, Askar wrote:
> Thank you Elsen Marc for your time and patience. Now HTCP vs ICP kinda
> clear to me

According to:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=squid-users&m=108124487727348&w=2
there's currently no big advantage for HTCP in SQUID and ICP should be
preferred.

But, according to rfc2756, section 1.2 (mentioned on
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=squid-users&m=93959526116935&w=2), there
may be some advantage, because of HTTP headers are transferred.

-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
   One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them, 
One OS to bring them all and into darkness bind them