Re: tproxy testing

From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@dont-contact.us>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:56:48 +0900

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008, Gonzalo Arana wrote:

> Why not tproxy4? Unless I am mistaken, latest linux kernel tproxy patch
> does not require the use of capabilities. Have a look at:

Because thats what we've got.

> http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2129
>
> I'll upload an up to date patch to the bug.

Ideally what I'd like to see is all of the transparency stuff
properly abstracted out. Squid-3 somewhat does this but only for the
standard server-spoofing stuff.

This way we can support tproxy2, tproxy4, and the FreeBSD stuff
I've got in a tree here.

Adrian
Received on Wed Jan 16 2008 - 06:47:03 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wed Jan 30 2008 - 12:00:09 MST