Re: Transparent-ly obtained objects in a name-based hierarchy: problems?

From: John Todd <>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 98 12:30:16 -0500

On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

> John Todd wrote:
> > How does one get around the discrepancy caused by IP-based versus
> > name-based cache object storage when working in a hierarchy of
> > mixed transparent and proxy-based caches?
> Don't use IP-based cache names as it breaks virtual servers and limits
> the cache hit ratio quite a bit (many servers have more than one IP, any
> you may have clients using you as a normal proxy -> a lot of duplicated
> objects that should only be cached once).
> The host name is sent (by almost all clients) as a Host: header in the
> request, and Squid can snarf the host name from there instead of using
> the IP. All code needed is already in squid, it is only a matter of
> enabling it and configuring squid.conf.

What's the penetration of browsers that support the Host: header? I took a
look at one point and was not pleased with the percentages, so I went with
IP-only, despite the penalty for multi-numbered hosts. I don't remember
exactly what the figures were, but it was <30% for a user base of about 300 -
a small sample, I realize, but often one must do with the information at

Does anyone have hard numbers on the Host: header usage in a
"representative" user base? (eg: more than 5000 dialup users in the US would
be a good sample, since that's the population I'm cross-sectioning.)

> How to configure squid as a transparent proxy:

There already. :)

[transproxy stuff munched]
> ---
> Henrik Nordstrom
> Sparetime Squid Hacker

Received on Wed Feb 18 1998 - 09:35:02 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:38:55 MST