You are right Amos.... Without loosing the original canary need :=) : [ for better I/O performance ] do not write in access.log some squid http status result codes. Example : not write in access.log 407, 403, 301, 302 squid status code. By reading docs and several discuss the only way to have this behavior is to use this kind of ACL. If you have an another way , i'm hearding you :) Best regards. -----Message d'origine----- De : squid-users [mailto:squid-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Amos Jeffries Envoyé : vendredi 13 mai 2016 13:27 À : squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Objet : Re: ACL is used in context without an HTTP response. Assuming mismatch On 13/05/2016 7:06 p.m., David Touzeau wrote: > Thanks Alex > > Any ACLs tips to avoid these warning ? or just assume it's normal in this > situation... ? > Yes and no. It was added to be a type of canary to unexpected behaviours in the config. So in that regard it has done its job well by making you look and ask about why its happening. What Alex describes there as potential causes could be a sign of clients having bad experiences with the proxy. Or just browser "Happy Eyeballs" doing its annoying thing. It'll have to be a judgement call for you whether to do much more investigation or not. The answer is also very specific to that one named ACL and how it was used. So other similar looking warnings could have very different impacts and severity. The only way to completely silence the warning right now is to not use that ACL for that access control. If its annoying we are open to adding a throttle to it. HTH Amos _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
