RE: [squid-users] offline mode issue

Thanks for the header_access suggestion, but unfortunately it is not
giving the desired results (yet). I know this is a bongo request, but
my customer wants to have as much as possible (even stuff that shouldn't
be) cached. Also, thanks for the pointer to that ircache web site. I
wonder if some other element of the page could be "ignored" to be able
to cache this site (and others) while offline? It gives this
information regarding google home page:
This object will be considered stale, because it doesn't have any
freshness information assigned. It doesn't have a validator present. It
won't be cached by proxies, because it has a Cache-Control: private
header. This object requests that a Cookie be set; this makes it and
other pages affected automatically stale; clients must check them upon
every request. It doesn't have a Content-Length header present, so it
can't be used in a HTTP/1.0 persistent connection.

I have also tried using a wwwoffle server inline (as a parent proxy) but
I'm getting REALLY unstable results that way. I'm thinking of looking
into some type of mirroring for a few key sites, but not sure how to
redirect requests from squid to the mirror contents. Any other ideas are
very appreciated!

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Robertson [mailto:crobertson@gci.net]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 12:51 PM
To: Squid Users
Subject: Re: [squid-users] offline mode issue

Shaun Skillin (home) wrote:
> I'm happy to provide whatever documentation I can, but I'd like to
make
> sure it's working first and this outstanding issue still has me
stumped.
> Here's a quick snip from the access log, going to a few sites. Notice
> that all of them are misses. Google is going to 3 different servers,
so
> I could maybe see a miss the first time it visits each site, but these
> are all misses every time. So, in the present setup, I cannot support
an
> offline_mode at all. Any ideas on this?
>
> 1159796708.843 555 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 31444 GET
> http://www.microsoft.com - DIRECT/207.46.225.60 text/html
>
http://www.ircache.net/cgi-bin/cacheability.py?query=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mi
crosoft.com%2F
> 1159796710.853 129 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 31444 GET
> http://www.microsoft.com - DIRECT/207.46.225.60 text/html
> 1159796712.730 84 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 31444 GET
> http://www.microsoft.com - DIRECT/207.46.225.60 text/html
> 1159796718.040 175 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 3984 GET
> http://www.google.com - DIRECT/66.102.7.104 text/html
>
http://www.ircache.net/cgi-bin/cacheability.py?query=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.go
ogle.com%2F
> 1159796719.611 88 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 3984 GET
> http://www.google.com - DIRECT/66.102.7.147 text/html
> 1159796720.844 91 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 3984 GET
> http://www.google.com - DIRECT/66.102.7.99 text/html
> 1159796851.780 90 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 3984 GET
> http://www.google.com - DIRECT/66.102.7.104 text/html
> 1159796853.392 84 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 3984 GET
> http://www.google.com - DIRECT/66.102.7.147 text/html
> 1159796854.326 87 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 3984 GET
> http://www.google.com - DIRECT/66.102.7.99 text/html
>
>
>
In both cases the page is set as "private" and not cache-able. You
could try using "header_access Cache_Control deny" with ACLs that
stipulate the sites you wish to cache, but that may have adverse effects

(actual private data, such as emails and custom search pages might be
cached).

Chris
Received on Sun Oct 08 2006 - 00:01:19 MDT