On 20/12/2011 7:40 a.m., Wladner Klimach wrote:
Look at this:
Every 2.0s: lsof -i :3128
Mon Dec
19 16:38:22 2011
COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFF NODE NAME
squid 20367 squid 12u IPv6 2474452 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4225
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 18u IPv6 2473286 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4202
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 22u IPv6 2474474 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4229
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 24u IPv6 2473304 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4204
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 28u IPv6 2473756 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4210
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 34u IPv6 2474462 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4227
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 38u IPv6 2474457 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4226
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 42u IPv6 2474467 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4228
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 44u IPv6 2474477 0t0 TCP
trotsky.redecamara.camara.gov.br:squid->cainf-269642.redecamara.camara.gov.br:4230
(ESTABLISHED)
squid 20367 squid 156u IPv6 2472223 0t0 TCP *:squid (LISTEN)
Is only has IPV6 conection types. Is this a problem or point a
possible bottleneck ?
Problem? no.
Possible bottleneck? depends if there is a slow IPv6 connectivity
between Squid and that remote machine (ie a tunnel with wrapping
overheads). ~75% of networks have faster IPv6 connectivity than IPv4
connectivity.
Amos
