On lör, 2008-10-04 at 19:15 +0200, Kinkie wrote:

> ...which is exactly what I was suggesting at the beginning of this thread.
> For rproxy scenarios, global_internal_static should cover the cases
> Mark is worried about.
> The only doubt I may have is how to best express access control (the
> current implementation is IMVHO kludgy).

To fit with the rest there should be an acl matching the cachemgr
action.

Regards
Henrik

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to