On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Tilmann Haug wrote:
> We recorded the network traffic and had strange findings: The applet tries to
> connect to port 65535 instead of port 80.
Ouch.
What does the proxy access logs say?
> Now the question is:
> How can squid influence the behavior of the two applets?
It can't, but depending on how the applet has been written it may get
confused if the browser is configured to use a proxy.
> What do the developpers have to change in the applet to avoid caching
> problems with squid?
Only use the basic http primitives which relies on the browser http
implementation, not some Java http implementation ontop of the Java TCP
direct network connections.
> What are the importend config directions to make sure the applets are not
> chached (for both squid and the application)?
applets are just http objects like any other. If your server has applets
which change such frequently that caching is not adviseable then you
should include the proper cache headers on your server. See "Caching
Tutorial for Web Authors and Webmasters" and/or "The Cacheability Engine".
> What relation between the request of port 65535 can there be in relation to
> squid?
Port 65535 is the same as port -1. -1 is sometimes used in applications
to represent "failed to understand the value".
As far as I know Squid never uses -1 as the port number if it fails to
understand the requested port number but instead completely rejects such
malformed requests. I don't see any relation to Squid as such.
Regards
Henrik
Received on Thu Dec 16 2004 - 15:28:37 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Sat Jan 01 2005 - 12:00:02 MST