On 4/09/19 2:59 am, fansari wrote:
> OK - I cannot figure out the whole requirement right now.
>
> In case it will not not work like this: with a) you mean "intercept" and
> with b) "tproxy"?
>
No for (b) I mean "TLS explicit". New connections from clients start
with TLS handshake immediately, n
On 4/09/19 9:54 pm, fansari wrote:
> If my understanding is correct when the client already has the content it
> sends a HEAD request to the squid and it will be checked whether the content
> on the squid is newer than the local cache of the client.
Maybe.
HTTP/1.0-only clients are likely to do s
on 2019/9/4 17:54, fansari wrote:
Is it possible to configure the squid in a way that such requests are not
answered by the squid itself but passed through to the internet? Because it
may happen that the content on the internet has changed - in this case the
client would compare against the old
If my understanding is correct when the client already has the content it
sends a HEAD request to the squid and it will be checked whether the content
on the squid is newer than the local cache of the client.
Is it possible to configure the squid in a way that such requests are not
answered by the
On 03.09.19 11:44, fansari wrote:
Seems that intercept is easier than tproxy.
FYI, tproxy means incercept AND changing outgoing IP address to the IP
address of the original client.
yes, intercept alone is easier, because tproxy means implementing
intercepting and something in addition.
nowada
