Hi Amos, On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 4:31 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From the RFC it seems like Redbot's request is perfectly valid, and so >> I feel like Squid should do the right thing and deduce from the host >> header what Redbot wants, and go through its ACLs. However, it just >> errors with: > > You missed the part where it says which type of recipient the various > URL forms are valid. > > The redbot example is a origin-form URL - valid only when sent to origin > servers (or reverse-proxy). The curl one is an absolute-form URL - valid > when sent to proxies and gateways. Thanks - that's a helpful distinction. >> Does this seem like a Squid config issue? Or do I need to make Redbot >> make a request like Curl does? > > Redbot is designed primarily for debugging HTTP problems with origin > servers to check why their output is not caching in a proxy or browser > properly. If you can find an option to inform it that it is operating > through a proxy, turn that on. There's no such option, and I had to modify RedFetcher to instantiate with a proxy. The constructor does support it, but there's no login in Thor or Redbot to behave differently if going through a proxy. Adding that functionality would be an option, but am I right in thinking squid should be able to infer the destination from the host header? Just looking at the documentation for http_port, would adding 'intercept' help, or is that explicitly for interception caching in conjunction with a traffic filter? S. _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
