Hey Amos. I believe we're already testing the package provided by Eliezer and have encountered some issues with the current workings. I know we'll be in touch with him shortly to discuss. Hopefully it's something fixable but he'll know more when we do :)
Thanks for the reply/info. Nick -- Nick Fennell n...@tbfh.org On 12 Feb 2013, at 10:08, Amos Jeffries <squ...@treenet.co.nz> wrote: > On 12/02/2013 10:31 p.m., Nick Fennell wrote: >> Hey Amos. >> >> I was waiting for that! >> >> We have a few requirements not yet satisfied in Squid 3.x, storeurl_rewrite >> features are a big one, so we're having to hold off until we're able to >> conjure something up. >> >> Can't get them ported across can you? ;-) > > That feature is already ported into 3.HEAD thanks to Eliezer. You can make > use of it by building that development package. As things stand today it will > be in 3.4 series. There is a bit of work and a lot of testing required to get > it into 3.3, but if anyone is interested in helping out with that let me > know. Eliezer has decided to concentrate on some needed further improvements > now rather than back-ports. > > >> WIth regard to 2.7, ZPH, are you aware of any bugs that may cause >> sibling_hit to be ineffective. I saw on the Lusca project that their code >> had an issue preventing the mark from ever being applied. I wonder if Squid >> suffers with a similar fault. > > I'm not aware of any bugs in the ZPH patch. They (ZPH) wrote two very > different versions of the feature for 2.7 and 3.x, and we have extended and > fixed the 3.x version in quite a few ways since it was merged. A lot of the > "bugs" people have reported are either in code which was never setting TOS at > all, or where they confused the up/down directionality of the packet flow. As > for Lusca vs 2.7, yes being a fork of that version it is likely that Lusca > contains any bug known in 2.7. > > Amos
