On mån, 2007-07-30 at 05:04 -0700, Ricardo Newbery wrote: > Under "How come some objects do not get cached?" > > http://wiki.squid-cache.org/SquidFaq/InnerWorkings#head- > aed2acb07aed79ef1f7a590447b6a45a8dd8e7d1 > > we read: > > > Responses for requests with an Authorization header are cachable > > ONLY if the reponse includes Cache-Control: Public. > > > > Responses with Vary headers are NOT cachable because Squid > > does not yet support Vary features. > > > The second line is no longer true. Correct?
Correct. > And regarding the first line, is this behavior overridden if we > include any "no_cache" or "cache" directives in the squid.conf? No, only if you include the ignore-auth flag in refresh_pattern. the cache (aka no_cache) directive can only further limit what Squid can cache. It can not make otherwise uncacheable content cached. Only refresh_pattern override flags can do that.. > I'm > trying to determine if the following Authorization line in my > squid.conf is superfluous: > > acl ac_cookie req_header Cookie [-1] __ac > acl auth_header req_header Authorization [-1] .* > cache deny ac_cookie auth_header > Would I get the same result with just: > > acl ac_cookie req_header Cookie [-1] __ac > cache deny ac_cookie I would say so yes. Regards Henrik
