Re: [SQU] what are you doing for redundancy?

Thanks to the group to pointing me at the auto-proxy configuration..I'm
kinda part-timing it on the Squid stuff here at work, so I don't always know
all the ins and outs..Thanks again..
As a follow-up to that though, what have you people noticed for timeouts
before your client goes to DIRECT if the cache is down..It took my windows
98 machine around 15-20 seconds...my linux box was immediate..both were
running Netscape..Is this a configurable option (the timeout) in Windows?

Cheers

Matt Ashfield
mda@unb.ca

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Kelley <tpkelley@winkinc.com>
To: Matt Ashfield <mda@unb.ca>
Cc: squid-users@ircache.net <squid-users@ircache.net>
Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: [SQU] what are you doing for redundancy?

>On Wednesday 10 January 2001 12:20, Matt Ashfield wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I'm using squid 2.3stable3 on AIX 4.3.3 as a proxy cache, and it's
working
>> ok. sometimes, i've had problems with squid crashing due to things like
>> filesystem sizes filling up and such...Not a big deal, but brings up the
>> issue of redundancy...How do you build it into your network using Squid?
If
>> the squid server goes down, all of your users effectively lose their
>> Internet access, unless they know how to un-configure their boxes so as
to
>> not use squid...THis is a major sticking point in selling the idea of
Squid
>> to my manager, so I'm wondering what the rest of you are doing?
>>
>
>Mostly, making sure my disks do not fill up. If the squid box had some
sort
>of drastic hardware failure, I could get another box up and running in a
few
>minutes as a temporary replacement. I'm not sure redundancy is that big of
a
>problem.
>
>--
>Tim Kelley
>tpkelley@winkinc.com

--
To unsubscribe, see http://www.squid-cache.org/mailing-lists.html