Hi Pablo Thanks for the suggestion. URLHASH would be a good idea for better hit ratio.
Someone told that, in some L7 switchs, some "abnormal" port 80 packets would be dropped (since it acts like a firewall) while the packets would be forwarded in L4 switchs. However, the behavior of L7 switch causes some normal sites could be browsed. Do you have similar experience? --- On Wed, 7/16/08, Pablo García <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Pablo García <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [squid-users] L4/L7 switch for caching > To: "Ryan Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2008, 2:46 AM > You want to balance your squid cache farm, using a URLHASH > algorithm, > to increase the hit ratio, that would be L7. > > Regards, Pablo > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Ryan Raymond > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dear all > > > > I would setup a caching farm for my subscribers (more > than 4K). Also, I expect a L4/L7 switch would be installed > for http traffic forwarding and load balancing. > > > > Could anyone suggest which switch configuration > (L4/L7) is better ? > > > > Thanks a lot > > Ryan > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
