On 2016-10-22 16:05, Yuri Voinov wrote:
Good explanations do not always help to get a good solution. A person
needs no explanation and solution.
So far I've seen a lot of excellent reasons why Squid can not do
so-and-so in the normal configuration. However, this explanation does
not help in solving problems.
Nothing personal, just observation.
IMO:
The only reason I believe explains why core developers of Squid tend to
move HTTP violating settings from average users is to prevent possible
abuse/misuse. Options like 'refresh_pattern ... ignore-vary' can severe
affect browsing experience if used by people without enough knowledge of
HTTP protocol(s). The abuse can easily compromise reputation of Squid
software.
Fortunately, the license of Squid permits modification of the software.
There are many ways to get desired and not yet implemented features of
Squid:
* Group of enthusiasts can easily make a fork project, name it
"Humboldt", for example and implement options like 'refresh_pattern ...
ignore-vary', 'host_forgery_verification off'. For example, some time
ago there was the project Lusca, which implemented address spoofing
(like TProxy) for BSD systems (among other features). The feature was
highly demanded and Squid project also implemented it later for BSD
systems. Now Lusca is not so popular.
* Commercial organizations like ISP or any other enterprise can hire a
developer to implement the options.
* Many system administrators with programming skills can successfully
modify the Squid sources to reach the goal. The squid-users list and
bugzilla remembers those success stories.
Nevertheless, I believe that core developers should publish an
_official_ explanations regarding the tendency, as it often becomes a
"center of gravity" of many topics.
Garri
_______________________________________________
squid-users mailing list
squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
