On Friday 12 September 2003 22.47, Michael Migdol wrote: > Is this a bug, or expected behavior? If this is expected behavior, > can someone please point me to whatever spec indicates that this is > expected behavior? Is there a config parameter somewhere that we > are missing?
It is sort of a bug. Squid is supposed to add a Warning header to the response headers if revalidation fails and Squid gives stale information to the client, but the Warning header has not yet been implemented in Squid. The X-Squid-Error header you saw was part of an internal error message never sent to the client. It is part of the internal error response to the If-Modified-Since request initiated by Squid to validate the already cached object. Apart from the missing Warning header Squid is operating inside the HTTP specifications. A If-Modified-Since header is "hop-by-hop" and does not alone guarantee the client will get the latest copy. When sent to a proxy-cache all it guarantees is that the client will get the latest copy the proxy-cache knows about. If your goal is to get the latest version then Cache-Control: no-cache should be used in addition to If-Modified-Since. (Cache-Control: max-age=0 is also suitable, but there may be bugs in Squid there in case of failed revalidations, not tested or verified) Regards Henrik -- Donations welcome if you consider my Free Squid support helpful. https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=hno%40squid-cache.org If you need commercial Squid support or cost effective Squid or firewall appliances please refer to MARA Systems AB, Sweden http://www.marasystems.com/, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
