On 2/12/2016 1:18 p.m., Michael Gibson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Having about 100% CPU usage after about an hour running. We operate Squid v
> 3.5 on multiple nodes. We range from 10 users, up through 200 on various
> nodes. We recently updated from 3.3 to 3.5 and I've been unable to contain
> the core
Hello,
Having about 100% CPU usage after about an hour running. We operate Squid v
3.5 on multiple nodes. We range from 10 users, up through 200 on various
nodes. We recently updated from 3.3 to 3.5 and I've been unable to contain
the core usage of Squid. I attempted to get multiple Squid workers
On 2/12/2016 6:27 a.m., klops wrote:
> Does this mean the squid box has to be the overall gateway for the internal
> network for transparrancy to work?
That is just one option. The other two are routing or tunnel, as I
mentioned in the second sentence.
>
> The reason the proposed setup the way i
On 2/12/2016 4:36 a.m., domshyra wrote:
> Hello. I have looked for countless hours to solve this problem.
> I have tried reordering the config file so that
> are all in different orders
>
> I've messed with http_access deny !Safe_ports
>
> None of the regular trouble shooting issues helped.
Does this mean the squid box has to be the overall gateway for the internal
network for transparrancy to work?
The reason the proposed setup the way it is is because AWS VPC service has
a service based NAT gateway which we have not low level control over and it
is the default gateway. We want to
Hello. I have looked for countless hours to solve this problem.
I have tried reordering the config file so that
are all in different orders
I've messed with http_access deny !Safe_ports
None of the regular trouble shooting issues helped.
I am on wifi on the pi with a static ip address, and I
Bump for the mailing list...
--
View this message in context:
http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/TCP-DENIED-403-on-raspberrypi-tp4680706p4680710.html
Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
squid-users mail
