Re: hop-count header

Duane Wessels <wessels@nlanr.net> writes:

> maex@Space.Net writes:
> >would set the radius value for this neighbor to 1.
> >On the other hand I trust my parent in the choice of neighbors, so I
> >set the radius to 2 and would accept objects that my parent got directly
> >or with radius 1 from its neighbors.
>
> I've thought about this as well. I think it would be very useful.
> I'm thinking of something like
>
> X-Max-Cache-Hops: 3

Hmm. You probably want

        X-Cache-Hops: 1

and increment each time.
 
> And each cache would decrement the counter before forwarding. When
> the count reaches zero, the request could only be forwarded to the
> origin server.
>
> But how does this affect someones desire to use a parent cache for all
> requests? Just yesterday on squid-users was a message from someone
> who pays $0.14/MB for parent cache traffic and $0.24/MB for direct
> traffic. Is this person willing to pay more just because the hops
> header reaches zero?

That's why you increment. Because then the local cache controls
policy, not the remote one.

Michael.
Received on Tue Jul 29 2003 - 13:15:44 MDT