Tony Dodd wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:33:26 -0700
Alex Rousskov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 23:31 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote:
Squid is a little different in its peer requirements. The peering
needs to be anchored off the name= parameter or in the absence of
that the peer ip/fqdn given. In squid THAT must be unique for
several other indexes similar to this.
There is no requirement in squid that the IP/http-port combo be
unique because the IP/icp-port combo may be the difference.
Agreed; the odd thing is, there is no error handling in this case.
Perhaps it would be worth giving some visible messages within cache.log
too, if you have multiple cache_peers specified with the same IP,
taking part in a CARP array. Currently, it's only looking to make sure
there is a name= to make them distinct as far as I can tell. I've
modified my code so that it now hashes on names if "carp_hash_name on"
is in the squid.conf. It will fall back to the old method if it is
either off, missing, or if p->name is empty.
What if Squid is not the only device doing CARP in a given
environment? It may be important to allow the administrator to
configure Squid hashing to match that of other devices so "extending"
the hashing specs may require an option to turn the extensions off.
Agreed; as per this, the default option is for this extension to be
disabled by default, and must be explicitly enabled within the
squid.conf using the carp_hash_name config option.
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2153 is updated with
the latest patch.
Looks good. Just missing a cf.data.pre write-up for squid.conf
Adrians call on the commit though.
Amos
--
Please use Squid 2.6STABLE17 or 3.0STABLE1.
There are serious security advisories out on all earlier releases.
