Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B85017F37 for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:47:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 99829 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2011 14:47:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@trafficserver.apache.org Received: (qmail 99795 invoked by uid 500); 18 Oct 2011 14:47:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@trafficserver.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@trafficserver.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@trafficserver.apache.org Received: (qmail 99787 invoked by uid 99); 18 Oct 2011 14:47:10 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:47:10 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [71.6.165.248] (HELO kramer.ogre.com) (71.6.165.248) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:47:02 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.154] (c-71-56-207-54.hsd1.co.comcast.net [71.56.207.54]) (authenticated bits=0) by kramer.ogre.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9IEkd3n020720 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:46:40 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 kramer.ogre.com p9IEkd3n020720 References: <1318905992.2680.10.camel@zym6400> <6cdb5b346b52621322a36a439a729f09.squirrel@zenmail.co.za> <1318922698.2680.17.camel@zym6400> <58c1656c95016b025fc958b78c36ca98.squirrel@zenmail.co.za> In-Reply-To: <58c1656c95016b025fc958b78c36ca98.squirrel@zenmail.co.za> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Message-Id: Cc: "users@trafficserver.apache.org" X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9A334) From: Leif Hedstrom Subject: Re: ICP^2 Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:46:40 -0600 To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I don't know if the docs are clear, but clustering is superior to ICP in eve= ry way. That is one reason why no one has cared for ICP I think. The main re= ason for us to get ICP working is for interoperability with other ICP caches= (e.g. Squid). Also, ICP is a flawed protocol, a better option is for us to implement HTCP,= which Squid also supports. cheers, -- Leif=20 On Oct 18, 2011, at 4:41 AM, "Henry C." wrote: > On Tue, October 18, 2011 09:24, ming.zym@gmail.com wrote: >> =C3=A5=C5=93=C2=A8 2011-10-18=C3=A4=C2=BA=C5=92=C3=A7=C5=A1=E2=80=9E 08:4= 3 +0200=C3=AF=C2=BC=C5=92Henry C.=C3=A5=E2=80=A0=E2=84=A2=C3=A9=C2=81=E2=80=9C= =C3=AF=C2=BC=C5=A1 >>> On Tue, October 18, 2011 04:46, ming.zym@gmail.com wrote: >>> Only once the down node >>> was brought back up did things become snappy again. >> there should be no issue when one cluster member down, it will discover t= he >> change and rehash the contents to the left nodes in cluster. the timeout o= r >> heatbeat checking will be <10s. after that, it will be stable as before. >=20 > Thanks, you were right - this had to do with the linux virtual server and i= t's > persistence setting on the directors. >=20