Re: REQ_AUTH implies DIRECT ?

From: Duane Wessels <>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 11:20:35 -0800 writes:

>in icp.c : icpHierarchical() this code is present:
> if (BIT_TEST(request->flags, REQ_AUTH))
> return 0;
>REQ_AUTH is set when an "Authentication:" header is found in
>the request, so it looks like all these requests never go through
>my parents cache.
>Is there a reason for this other than safety?

The primary reason is scalability. Handling POST requests directly
takes load off your parent caches. Since POST is inherently
uncachable, there is no chance of getting a 'HIT' so why
bother a parent cache with it?

>On a totally unrelated note, is it possible to direct "POST"
>requests through my parents? The 'passthrough_proxy' only allows
>for a single parent, but I'd like to treat these "POST" requests
>like ordinary "GET" requests (different parents for different

Depending on your configuration, you might be able to make
it work. If the cache_host_domain rules are such that
there is only one parent cache for the request (and no siblings!)
then the passthrough code should use that parent and log it

>Why? Because there are some services where you need to login,
>which uses POST. The remote side remembers the IP address of my
>proxy. Then when I try to GET some info, the request goes through
>my parent and is refused (they _also_ check by IP number) :(


Duane W.
Received on Fri Jan 24 1997 - 11:39:16 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:34:10 MST