On 09/06/2010 04:13 PM, Andrew Beverley wrote:
On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 23:06 +0100, Andrew Beverley wrote:
* I find the terminology inconsistent and confusing: outgoing,
clientside, upstream. No wonder you have to explain the difference
twice. Unless these are all standard RFC-like terms, please use
something consistent like fromClient, toClient, fromServer, toServer.
Others may suggest a better scheme, but this one at least does not
require constant doc lookups to understand where "out" and "up" is.
Agreed. This confusion is also present in the names of the configuration
parameters: initially I found the current ones confusing (it took me a
while to realise that one was server side and one client side).
At the minute they are tcp_outgoing_tos and clientside_tos. Would there
be any objection to changing the tcp_outgoing_tos to serverside_tos? Or
would you prefer not to break existing squid.conf configurations?
IMHO, both: Change the documented/primary option names but accept the
old ones with a "deprecated" warning. There may even be a built-in
mechanism for that (multiple NAME values?), but I am not sure.
Ah yes, you can specify multiple NAME values. Funnily enough, this is
already the case for tcp_outgoing_tos, which is also known as
tcp_outgoing_ds and tcp_outgoing_dscp. The disadvantage of this is that
it doesn't display a deprecated warning.
You probably want to wait for others to comment before changing
squid.conf option names though.
How about I change the "default" name to serverside_tos, and leave
tcp_outgoing_tos with tcp_outgoing_ds and tcp_outgoing_dscp as an
accepted name?
Or maybe they should be serverside_outgoing_tos and
clientside_outgoing_tos to make it even clearer?
IMHO, "outgoing" is a bad term because its meaning changes depending on
whether you are a forward or reverse proxy.
Similarly, "serverside" is bad because that is what developers call the
client side of Squid.
from_client, to_server, etc. do not come with the above problems.
HTH,
Alex.
