Hi Mark,
I have 2 identical servers (CentOS 4.2), with same squid version and
interception iptables settings.
I have the same boinc client behind both squid servers,
and in one that work I see:
1140608197.087 3022 192.168.1.1 TCP_MISS/200 248 POST
http://setiboincdata.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/file_upload_handler -
DIRECT/66.28.250.125 text/plain
and in the problematic squid server I see:
1140566460.404 2060 192.168.2.90 TCP_MISS/100 123 POST
http://setiboincdata.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/file_upload_handler -
DIRECT/66.28.250.125 -
What does TCP_MISS/100 mean? As I see, the correct value should be
TCP_MISS/200
Many thanks
Oliver
Mark Elsen wrote:
> mmm, didn't that interception has all this problems. I have been using
it for years in some
client's servers.
It does.
Do you know how can I debug even further?
I'd really stress (advise), that you probably found an application
which is broken by using transp. proxying, following the many
hola-cola issues mentioned,
hence tear-down any further thinking and provide none transparant http
access for boinc (when configured to use http proxy).
M.
--
Oliver Schulze L.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
