nanog mailing list archives

Re: Digex transparent proxying


From: Rich Sena <ras () poppa clubrich tiac net>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:18:12 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 28 Jun 1998, andrew khoo wrote:

more aggressive caching techniques would necessitate that the tags be
ignored anyway, and the "dynamic" content would still be cached. expires
etc are only useful if the caching box decides to honour them.

The tags are usually ignored by default - the html tags I mean - unless
itis parsed into http most caches will ignore it and you do have a
problem.  The majority of caches I've seen have a built exclusion for the
usual "always dynamic" items - cgi, "?" in path, asp... .

some of the content providers in the US would turn over in their graves if
they knew what people who pay heaps more $$$ for traffic are doing to
their web sites :). we have done some funky stuff with content (read:
caching of dynamic pages, even .asps, "tokenized" HTML, dropping realaudio
UDP etc etc etc).

Yup - you folk in Australiaview caching as the norm - not the enemy. Go
figure...

--
I am nothing if not net-Q! - ras () poppa clubrich tiac net



Current thread: