27.01.2017 19:35, Garri Djavadyan пишет: > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 17:58 +0600, Yuri wrote: >> 27.01.2017 17:54, Garri Djavadyan пишет: >>> On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 15:47 +0600, Yuri wrote: >>>> --2017-01-27 15:29:54-- https://www.microsoft.com/ru-kz/ >>>> Connecting to 127.0.0.1:3128... connected. >>>> Proxy request sent, awaiting response... >>>> HTTP/1.1 200 OK >>>> Cache-Control: no-cache, no-store >>>> Pragma: no-cache >>>> Content-Type: text/html >>>> Expires: -1 >>>> Server: Microsoft-IIS/8.0 >>>> CorrelationVector: BzssVwiBIUaXqyOh.1.1 >>>> X-AspNet-Version: 4.0.30319 >>>> X-Powered-By: ASP.NET >>>> Access-Control-Allow-Headers: Origin, X-Requested-With, >>>> Content- >>>> Type, >>>> Accept >>>> Access-Control-Allow-Methods: GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, OPTIONS >>>> Access-Control-Allow-Credentials: true >>>> P3P: CP="ALL IND DSP COR ADM CONo CUR CUSo IVAo IVDo PSA PSD >>>> TAI >>>> TELo >>>> OUR SAMo CNT COM INT NAV ONL PHY PRE PUR UNI" >>>> X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN >>>> Vary: Accept-Encoding >>>> Content-Encoding: gzip >>>> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 09:29:56 GMT >>>> Content-Length: 13322 >>>> Set-Cookie: MS-CV=BzssVwiBIUaXqyOh.1; domain=.microsoft.com; >>>> expires=Sat, 28-Jan-2017 09:29:56 GMT; path=/ >>>> Set-Cookie: MS-CV=BzssVwiBIUaXqyOh.2; domain=.microsoft.com; >>>> expires=Sat, 28-Jan-2017 09:29:56 GMT; path=/ >>>> Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=0; includeSubDomains >>>> X-CCC: NL >>>> X-CID: 2 >>>> X-Cache: MISS from khorne >>>> X-Cache-Lookup: MISS from khorne:3128 >>>> Connection: keep-alive >>>> Length: 13322 (13K) [text/html] >>>> Saving to: 'index.html' >>>> >>>> index.html 100%[==================>] 13.01K --.- >>>> KB/s in >>>> 0s >>>> >>>> 2017-01-27 15:29:57 (32.2 MB/s) - 'index.html' saved >>>> [13322/13322] >>>> >>>> Can you explain me - for what static index.html has this: >>>> >>>> Cache-Control: no-cache, no-store >>>> Pragma: no-cache >>>> >>>> ? >>>> >>>> What can be broken to ignore CC in this page? >>> Hi Yuri, >>> >>> >>> Why do you think the page returned for URL >>> [https://www.microsot.cpom/r >>> u-kz/] is static and not dynamically generated one? >> And for me, what's the difference? Does it change anything? In >> addition, >> it is easy to see on the page and even the eyes - strangely enough - >> to >> open its code. And? What do you see there? > I see an official home page of Microsoft company for KZ region. The > page is full of javascripts and products offer. It makes sense to > expect that the page could be changed intensively enough. In essence, the question is, what to say? In addition to the general discussion of particulars or examples? As I said - this is just one example. A lot of them. And I think sometimes it's better to chew than talk. > > >>> The index.html file is default file name for wget. >> And also the name of the default home page in the web. Imagine - I >> know >> the obvious things. But the question was about something else. >>> man wget: >>> --default-page=name >>> Use name as the default file name when it isn't known >>> (i.e., for >>> URLs that end in a slash), instead of index.html. >>> >>> In fact the https://www.microsoft.com/ru-kz/index.html is a stub >>> page >>> (The page you requested cannot be found.). >> You living in wrong region. This is geo-dependent page, as obvious, >> yes? > What I mean is the pages https://www.microsoft.com/ru-kz/ and https://w > ww.microsoft.com/ru-kz/index.html are not same. You can easily confirm > it. > > >> Again. What is the difference? I open it from different >> workstations, >> from different browsers - I see the same thing. The code is >> identical. I >> can is to cache? Yes or no? > I'm a new member of Squid community (about 1 year). While tracking for > community activity I found that you can't grasp the advantages of > HTTP/1.1 over HTTP/1.0 for caching systems. Especially, its ability to > _safely_ cache and serve same amount (but I believe even more) of the > objects as HTTP/1.0 compliant caches do (while not breaking internet). > The main tool of HTTP/1.1 compliant proxies is _revalidation_ process. > HTTP/1.1 compliant caches like Squid tend to cache all possible objects > but later use revalidation for dubious requests. In fact the > revalidation is not costly process, especially using conditional GET > requests. Nuff said. Let's stop waste time. Take a look on attachement. > > I found that most of your complains in the mail list and Bugzilla are > related to HTTPS scheme. FYI: The primary tool (revalidation) does not > work for HTTPS scheme using all current Squid branches at the moment. > See bug 4648. Forgot about it. Now I've solved all of my problems. > > Try to apply the proposed patch and update all related bug reports. I have no unresolved problems with caching. For me personally, this debate - only of academic interest. You can continue to spend their time in the reasoning, whose side take - smart or beautiful. Let me leave you, I have what to do with my free time. > > HTH > > > Garri > _______________________________________________ > squid-users mailing list > squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users -- Bugs to the Future
Attachment:
861wNcx.png
Description: PNG image
Attachment:
0x613DEC46.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
