Re:Re: Puzzled at flags.hierarchicala and neighbors_do_private_keys after reading FAQ. :-(

From: Henrik Nordstrom <>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 12:33:53 +0200

On Saturday 20 April 2002 07:40, wrote:
> Thanks, Henrik pal!
> I think when !flags.hierarchical is true, we should not send
> request to any of the ICP peers and should send the request
> directly to the server. Am I correct?


> I still have a question. After reading "What does ``Disabling use
> of private keys'' mean?" in FAQ, I am puzzled why a cache can use
> an object with a private key in another ICP peer? I think the
> object with private keys can only be shared by one user until it is
> public. How can other peer ICP caches use an object with private
> key?

Because ICP has a field where the caller can store a private unique
identified identifying the ICP query. From this we can then find
which request (and StoreEntry) trigered the ICP query when receiving
a ICP reply.

If the other peer do not support this field, all we know when
receiving the ICP reply is the URL of the object. This makes it
somewhat tricky to identify exacly which request the ICP reply is for.

Ignore the ICP interactions for now. Just remember that objects
having a private key is private to their user (cannot be shared), and
objects having a public key is shareable, allowing cache hits.

Received on Sat Apr 20 2002 - 06:14:05 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:15:14 MST