nanog mailing list archives

Re: Digex transparent proxying


From: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:40:57 -0700

At 08:16 AM 6/28/98 -0400, Rich Sena wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jun 1998, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:

How, pray tell, are they maximizing their distro and what? They way I
understand it, they proxy-cache digex has set up optimizes for html, but
screws everything else. Please tell me if I'm wrong. 

Hmmm - you're wrong... the only traffic that would be diverted to this
cache is port 80 - if they are using an alteon switch then the alteon
makes a decision to redirect port 80 traffic ONLY to the port that the
cache is connected to.

Thank you. So if I provide my links on a different port then I by-pass the
proxy, cute. However, many of my customers have some ferocious firewalls
that only allow port 80. Of course those machines are running their apache
somewhere else. But, I use port 80 to run an SSH tunnel to them.

FYI, 80 to 90 percent of our served traffic is SSH encrypted, or SSL with
nil TTLs.

Differnt port...

Caching is fine for non-transient data. I have yet to see either an SSL or
SSH stream meet these requirements. With privacy issues coming to the
fore-front, a transient domain is much more likely to encounter these types
of streams.

Not effected...


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


___________________________________________________ 
Roeland M.J. Meyer, ISOC (InterNIC RM993) 
e-mail: <mailto:rmeyer () mhsc com>rmeyer () mhsc com
Internet phone: hawk.mhsc.com
Personal web pages: <http://www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer>www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
Company web-site: <http://www.mhsc.com/>www.mhsc.com/
___________________________________________ 
SecureMail from MHSC.NET is coming soon!  


Current thread: