On 03/09/17 17:37, Jonathan thomas Cho wrote:
Hello, I seem to have a issue with cache peer. I have 2 parent IPS,
however, I want port 3128 to go to 1 parent while 3129 go to the second
parent. Here is my current config, I hope you can adjust it for me.
Not without understanding what it is you are actually trying to achieve.
What you ask for above is satisfied by adding cache_peer_access rules.
BUT your explanation below of _why_ you want it indicates you may
actually need something entirely different to what you are asking about.
Thank you
Http_port 3128
http_port 3129
coredump_dir /var/spool/squid3
refresh_pattern ^ftp: 1440 20% 10080
refresh_pattern ^gopher: 1440 0% 1440
refresh_pattern -i (/cgi-bin/|\?) 0 0% 0
refresh_pattern (Release|Packages(.gz)*)$ 0 20% 2880
refresh_pattern . 0 20% 4320
cache_peer 1xx.xxx.xxx.xxx parent 3128 0 proxy-only no-query default
login=username:password name=user1
cache_peer 1xx.xxx.xxx.xxx parent 3128 0 proxy-only no-query default
login=username:password name=user2
never_direct allow all
as you can see, I’m not entirely sure on what to do to route each parent
ip to specific port so users cant use more ports than needed.
That sentence does not compute.
a) there is no sign of any "user" in your config.
Squid does have credentials that is sends to each peer - but that has
nothing to do with any human / user. It is a pair of *machine*
credentials for Basic auth representing Squid itself.
b) You have not configured the standby= parameters which force Squid to
open more connections than it needs. So your Squid already does require
every single port it opens to those peers.
ie It is not possible for this Squid to be encountering the problem
you say your are trying to avoid.
Also, Squid uses the multiplexing and pipeline mechanisms in HTTP. So
any port opens to the peer *will* be used for multiple messages until
one requires it to be closed.
By manually configuring specific routing you are add limits to those
mechanisms which are likely to result in *more* ports being used to each
peer. Since Squid can no longer pipeline traffic contradictory to your
rules even if peer #1 has no open ports and peer #2 has an open and
available port waiting for messages such as the one your rules send to
peer #1 - and vice versa.
So, you are apparently trying to work around a problem that this Squid
cannot encounter by adding complexity that will cause it to happen.
Can you more clearly describe what exactly you are trying to achieve here?
and what problem you have encountered (or think you might) that is
behind your request?
Amos
_______________________________________________
squid-users mailing list
squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
