Michael Gale wrote:
Hello,
I guess I should of also asked if ziproxy could exist between the
squid cache #1 system and squid cache #2 system.
I initially ruled this out ... I figured that when the squid servers
talk to one another that it would not be HTTP. But I guess it could be ?
Anyways, any insight will be helpful.
Michael
Michael Gale wrote:
Hey,
We are currently using ziproxy (http://ziproxy.sourceforge.net/)
in a transparent setup to compress (Gzip) the data between the
requesting client and the end server. We also scale down requested
images to conserve bandwidth.
Now we would like to implement a squid proxy to make use of it's
cache. We are looking at a setup like the following:
Old setup:
Internet <--> ziproxy in transparent mode <--> slow link <--> client
New setup:
Internet <--> squid cache #1 <--> slow link <--> squid cache #2 <-->
client
Squid cache #1 and squid cache #2 will have some form of cache
hierarch setup between them. So if we want to continue to use the
ziproxy software we will lose the Gzip compression benefits but will
retain the image scaling.
My question is, will having squid go through ziproxy have any affects
on the cache use ? Because the image(gif,jpeg,tif,..) on the server
will never match the copy received by squid cache #1. Since it would
be scaled / altered on it's way down ?
Thanks
Yes it usually is. So the ziproxy will easily keep its current position
at the head of the slow link.
However, you make a worrying comment at the end there. Ziproxy or any
that alter the content MUST adapting the HTTP headers to match the new
content. If its not doing that its should not be used to live traffic.
Amos
--
Please use Squid 2.6STABLE17+ or 3.0STABLE1+
There are serious security advisories out on all earlier releases.
