1.2 Direct Rule

From: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira <lioux@dont-contact.us>
Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 01:52:50 -0300

        "Direct or not direct, that's the question."
        Or, should it be always_direct or never_direct for that matter.
        Enough color. I checked the FAQ and the 1.2 distribution squid.conf but I
was not able to find a clear documentation for those directives. Perhaps, I
might be just overlooking something.
        Here follows my setup:

        1) Local Network
        - 2 proxy servers: 1.2beta20 (A) and 1.2beta18 (B)
        - relationship: sibling with each other

        2) Upstream provider
        - 2 proxy servers: 1.1.14 (C) and unknown (D)
        - relationship: C is parent and D is sibling for both A and B proxy

           A-----+-----B (Local Network)
           C-----+-----D (Upstream Provider)

        Here follows the desired behavior:

        - users access the local servers runnning in a round-robin manner (I am
working on a mix of SuperProxyScripts and Redirector solution);
        - for example, when they access A, if it is a MISS, it should check B with
        - if B is a MISS also, then A should try D;
        - if D is a MISS, then A should try C that will fullfill its role as a
        - and, if the destination site is on the local network, it should be
accessed directly.
        Of course, if accessing the destination site is faster than trying these
many places that should be preferred.
        Writing this kind of rules for 1.1 was quite out of the box just requiring
some patches. :-)

        However, I did not quite understand the exact behavior of these new
rulesets on 1.2.
        The cache relationships are configured correctly with weight and stuff.
        I am able to access the C and D upstream caches correctly. However, both
servers on the local network do not check each other.
        I tried something like this (the CIDR are only an example):

        acl localnetwork dst

        always_direct allow localnetwork
        never_direct deny localnetwork
        (not sure about the rest)

        Are the desired behaviors at all possible? How do I achieve them?
        I apologize for my "cluelessness" on this matter. I am sorry if this is
written somewhere or if it was already answered on this list.
        I am sure that I might be just overlooking something. This must be one of
those things that are right in front of you but you need somebody to point
them out for you.

                Mario Ferreira

Mario S. F. Ferreira		System Administration/Consulting @ GNS
Email(no _s): _L_ioux(at)g_ns.com.br | PGP key/contact info: finger Email
Global Network Solutions Tec | http://www.GNS.com.br/ | # +55 061 3272627
FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/
    Support the Anti-Spam amendment. See http://www.CAuce.ORG/
Received on Fri May 15 1998 - 22:02:33 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:40:12 MST