________________________________ > From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >To: squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Sent: Tuesday, 28 May 2013 4:15 PM >Subject: Re: Re: TPROXY > > >On 28/05/2013 8:11 p.m., Amm wrote: >> ________________________________ >>> From: alvarogp <alvarix.gp@xxxxxxxxx> >>> To: squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> Sent: Tuesday, 28 May 2013 1:28 PM >>> Subject: Re: TPROXY >>> >>> >>> alvarogp wrote: >>>> If Squid is running, the packets from the local LAN are routed correctly >>>> and the web pages are showed perfectly. The problem I have is that this >>>> accesses are not reflected in the access.log and cache.log, so could be >>>> possible that squid is not caching any cacheable content? >> I have had exact same problem when I was trying TPROXY with similar >> configuration. >> >> Squid would route packets but not LOG anything in access log. >> >> If I stop squid then clients cant access any website. (this indicates that >> packets are indeed routing through squid). > >access.log would indicate that none of them are actually making it to >the Squid process. > >Perhapse the Ubuntu kernel version has a bug which makes the packets >work when *some* process it listening on the required port, but the >packets actually not getting there. Actually I had tried on Fedora 16 kernel version is 3.6.X. So now this bug is in Ubuntu as well as Fedora? Dont remember squid version but it was 3.2 series. >Or perhapse TCP packets are sending the HTTP reuqest through Squid and >Squid relaying it but the response not going back to Squid (direct back >to client). In that event Squid would wait for some time (read/write >timeouts are 15 minutes long) before logging the failed HTTP >transaction. That could be caused by some bad configuration on a router >outside of the Squid machine. May be, I dont know what was happening. As I didnt give it much thought that time. I will try again this week end and report back. This time I will wait for 15 minutes. Thanks Amm.
