> > > > As I said earlier the method of indexing the peers based on their IP is > > broken, not only because we do not sort the peers on their IP but also > > because there may be multiple peers on the same IP or same IP:PORT > > even.. > >
Yes , I knew. For the time beeing, I'm only trying to reach the point on Squid 3 for the same funcionality on Squid 2, even with the wrong IP indexing schema > > Regards > > Henrik > > Yeah, I though Rafael was fixing that after our earlier discussions > about keys to use. I guess not (yet) though. > Then we willl open the discussion on how to index the new table with several peers on the same node...(taking a look on how an iftable does...) Just walking on a "solid" implementation. > The order still appears to be broken even if there was another level to > the key. The IPA being out of order regardless of how they are configured. > My reading of the code indicates its a linked-list of peers, right? > If so they can/should be sorted into position using < or > operators on > IPAddress to get around this simple case to a large degree. It will > still be needed anyway if the key gets expanded later. > > We will see. > Good to know about that -cC trick. > > Amos
