On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 6:35 PM, H <hm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Eliezer Croitoru wrote: >> On 03/04/2012 18:30, Carlos Manuel Trepeu Pupo wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Amos Jeffries<squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> On 03.04.2012 02:21, Carlos Manuel Trepeu Pupo wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thanks a looooooottttt !! That's what I'm missing, everything work >>>>> fine now. So this script can use it cause it's already works. >>>>> >>>>> Now, I need to know if there is any way to consult the active request >>>>> in squid that work faster that squidclient !!!! >>>>> >>>> >>>> ACL types are pretty easy to add to the Squid code. I'm happy to >>>> throw an >>>> ACL patch your way for a few $$. >>>> >>>> Which comes back to me earlier still unanswered question about why >>>> you want >>>> to do this very, very strange thing? >>>> >>>> Amos >>>> >>> >>> >>> OK !! Here the complicate and strange explanation: >>> >>> Where I work we have 128 Kbps for the use of almost 80 PCs, a few of >>> them use download accelerators and saturate the channel. I began to >>> use the ACL maxconn but I have still a few problems. 60 of the clients >>> are under an ISA server that I don't administrate, so I can't limit >>> the maxconn to them like the others. Now with this ACL, everyone can >>> download but with only one connection. that's the strange main idea. >> what do you mean by only one connection? >> if it's under one isa server then all of them share the same external IP. >> > > Hi > > I am following this thread with mixed feelings of weirdness and > admiration ... > > there are always two ways to reach a far point, it's left around or > right around the world, depending on your position one of the ways is > always the longer one. I can understand that some without hurry and > money issues chose the longer one, perhaps also because of more chance > for adventurous happenings, unknown and the unexpected > > so know I explained in a similar long way what I do not understand, why > would you make such a complicated out of scope code, slow, certainly > dangerous ... if at least it would be perl, but bash calling external > prog and grepping, whow ... when you can solve it with a line of code ? > > this task would fit pf or ipfw much better, would be more elegant and > zillions times faster and secure, not speaking about time investment, > how much time you need to write 5/6 keywords of code? > > or is it for demonstration purpose, showing it as an alternative > possibility? > It's great read this. I just know BASH SHELL, but if you tell me that I can make this safer and faster... Previously post I talk about this!! That someone tell me if there is a better way of do that, I'm newer !! Please, if you can guide me > > -- > H > +55 11 4249.2222 >
