Mailing-List: contact users-help@trafficserver.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <b0e922480b247038536de18801b3228f.squirrel@zenmail.co.za>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:39:27 +0200
Subject: Parent proxy instead of ICP
From: "Henry C." <henka@cityweb.co.za>
To: users@trafficserver.apache.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.5.2 [SVN]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Greets,

I'm trying out ts as a reverse-proxy on a cluster.

I see from the docs and list that ICP is b%rken, so I'm giving parent.config a
try.  I've got it configured, but I have no idea whether it's working or not. 
I can see the TCP_MISS/200 and subsequent DIRECT-to-origin in squid.log, but I
don't see anything in the parent's log squid.log (ie, I don't know where to
look to confirm that the sibling is consulting the parent about the missed
object).

My sibling config:
/usr/local/etc/trafficserver/parent.config:
dest_host=.  parent="zp0:80"  round_robin=strict
# zp0 is the parent hostname

/usr/local/etc/trafficserver/records.config:
CONFIG proxy.config.http.parent_proxy_routing_enable INT 1

...and then ran
~# traffic_line  -x

...and for good measure
~# trafficserver  restart


I'm using CentOS 5.x.

~# traffic_server  --version
[TrafficServer] using root directory '/usr/local'
Apache Traffic Server - traffic_server - 3.0.1 - (build # 91415 on Oct 14 2011
at 15:13:32)

I'd appreciate any pointers/hints on what I'm doing wrong or where to look to
confirm that the sibling->parent communication is happening.  Hopefully ICP
will be fixed SomeDaySoon(tm), since ts is rather hamstrung without this in a
large cluster environment.


-- 
Regards
Henry