Hello!
Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007, Chris Nighswonger wrote:
On 3/18/07, Matthew Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a number of squid boxes using this setup at a number of sites - I
have only found two sites that are behaving in this way.
It does not sound like an issue with
Hello!
Chris Nighswonger wrote:
On 3/18/07, Matthew Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a number of squid boxes using this setup at a number of sites - I
have only found two sites that are behaving in this way.
It does not sound like an issue with Squid. I run 2.6STABLE9 on FC6
with ntlm
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007, Chris Nighswonger wrote:
> On 3/18/07, Matthew Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I have a number of squid boxes using this setup at a number of sites - I
> >have only found two sites that are behaving in this way.
>
> It does not sound like an issue with Squid. I run 2.6STA
On 3/18/07, Matthew Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a number of squid boxes using this setup at a number of sites - I
have only found two sites that are behaving in this way.
It does not sound like an issue with Squid. I run 2.6STABLE9 on FC6
with ntlm and no problem. It sounds more lik
Hello!
Sorry to post this again, but I am not sure where to progress further
with this. Details below:
Guido Serassio wrote:
At 23.51 28/02/2007, Matthew Smith wrote:
I am seeing very similar behaviour in squid 2.5 as what is mentioned
in this bug report:
http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/sh
