-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 02.11.2016 2:58, Alex Rousskov пишет: > On 11/01/2016 02:47 PM, Yuri Voinov wrote: > >> if the SSL bump will be impossible to do - >> whether it should be understood that in such a situation you close the >> project Squid as unnecessary? :) Seriously, why does it then need to be >> in a world without HTTP? > > Believe it or not, there are still many Squid use cases where bumping is "Wow, Plop-Plop, what a terrible story" ;) > > unnecessary. This includes, but is not limited to, HTTPS proxying cases > with peek/splice/terminate rules and environments where Squid possesses Sure, I know. I meet this every day exactly. This is no problem still remains relatively low percent. > > the certificate issued by CAs trusted by clients. There are also IETF > attempts to standardize transmission of encrypted but proxy-cachable > content. Hope they not completely headless. > > > I agree that Squid user base will shrink if nobody can bump 3rd party > traffic, but that reduction alone will not kill Squid. Hope at this. It is difficult to make long-term plans if the software has to die soon. :) > > > Alex. - -- Cats - delicious. You just do not know how to cook them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYGQMgAAoJENNXIZxhPexGocQIAMU0g7zH7B7gMwgatt2PdA27 Jx+Frqnh+V8fYDEtLYwWRwSO5EmtCIG2Zx90LYiljN6mxvKd7hCBseJczf7nTsh4 bLumPaX6VWOLrPBGDRuWvqXfn6xFDX3uBLqyTWQUnNX6GuiuqkGQ2JvXctbNQA1A NV0VYM5Dg/p/JZDKqQdB41ip7IEm+mWp7xcd7S377or0vNkiVS4oZWj0goYZGER5 yuWg9K2TA5HbLhjBou+G6VXPCLx5LDTCAl9gxTLm/qc/v/6cO1Wi6LxhAI7YOBuR c/r5Rqj+bsbWqxD3ma9Pdg2m+WR8Z15mSTRm+jFYlsjae9b8ApggDXaabLWuL4I= =kuNU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Attachment:
0x613DEC46.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
_______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
