Re: Fwd: Update-Accelerator 3.0

Re: Fwd: Update-Accelerator 3.0

[Michael Tremer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 949 bytes --]

On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 21:02 +0100, Jan Behrens wrote:



> okay dynamic is not always really dynamic. Youtube-Videos are also
> dynamic content to squid.
> So is everything with ? in the URL threaded as dynamic in squid.

That's a bad decision if that is true, because having a query term does
not necessarily make content dynamic. There are things like the Expires:
and Pragma: headers in HTTP to control what has to be cached and for how
long.

> well it would be possible to cache HTTPS - Content with
> "Man-in-the-Middle" Squid.
> The client will make a HTTPS-connection to squid and squid will make
> it's connection to the original destination server. At this point
> squid can serve and save content.

Not with me. This heavily violates the concept of secure communication.
In my opinion, I cannot trust the proxy to correctly verify the server's
certificate for example. This is only one among a whole bunch of
security issues.

-Michael

Re: Fwd: Update-Accelerator 3.0

[Jörn-Ingo Weigert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2724 bytes --]

Hmm,

hmm, so there could be some naming ideas:

- file store (which describe it exactly)
- update cache (not really, cause it is not limited on updates)
- cache accelerator (not really, cause it doesn't really speed up on
first time, as Michael mentioned)
- file speedster

Any other ideas?

Ingo

2013/3/5 Michael Tremer <michael.tremer(a)ipfire.org>:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 13:50 +0100, Jörn-Ingo Weigert wrote:
>> @Devel: You are also welcome to share some ideas for upcoming version
>> of update-accelerator
>
> Here is an idea from me: I would like to rename "Update Accelerator",
> because:
>  * It is hard to spell and a lot of people mispronounce it.
>  * It is a very long word. That's not only inconvenient to type but also
>    bloats navigation bars and so on.
>  * It really does not make clear what the software does, because it does
>    not accelerate the download of an update (at least not in the first
>    place), so it would be better to use the word "cache" here.
>  * If we enhance the functionality it won't be limited to "updates",
>    so that won't fit anymore either.
>  * We don't want to confuse it with the piece of software that is an
>    add-on for IPCop.
>
> I could even find more reasons, but I couldn't find a name which is
> better so far.
>
>> Hello Fajar,
>>
>> I would like to say hello and get in contact with you.
>>
>> Michael from IPFire.org told me that you may have some requirements or
>> ideas for an improved update accelerator, cause we plan to extend the
>> current version (at this point it look like a complete rewrite o_O)
>>
>> So how is your current situation?
>> It would be great if you can give some details of your current system,
>> your users, for what you use the update accelerator, the kind of files
>> you currently store and the space it currently used.
>>
>> What could be improved or changed in an upcoming version?
>> What is disturbing you at moment?
>>
>> To share the ideas & requirements I've added a Wiki-Page on
>> wiki.ipfire.org, where Ideas & current problems could be shared URL:
>> http://wiki.ipfire.org/en/development/update-accelerator
>
> Please move this to the "new" development area over here:
>
> http://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/proxy/update-accelerator
>
> The pages in /en/development are pretty outdated or wrong. We also
> wanted to move the development stuff away from the part of the wiki that
> is translated, because development documentation is not worth the
> translation because of the limited amount of people who are reading it.
>
> -Michael
>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development(a)lists.ipfire.org
> http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: Fwd: Update-Accelerator 3.0

[Michael Tremer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2134 bytes --]

Hello,

On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 13:50 +0100, Jörn-Ingo Weigert wrote:
> @Devel: You are also welcome to share some ideas for upcoming version
> of update-accelerator

Here is an idea from me: I would like to rename "Update Accelerator",
because:
 * It is hard to spell and a lot of people mispronounce it.
 * It is a very long word. That's not only inconvenient to type but also
   bloats navigation bars and so on.
 * It really does not make clear what the software does, because it does
   not accelerate the download of an update (at least not in the first
   place), so it would be better to use the word "cache" here.
 * If we enhance the functionality it won't be limited to "updates",
   so that won't fit anymore either.
 * We don't want to confuse it with the piece of software that is an
   add-on for IPCop.

I could even find more reasons, but I couldn't find a name which is
better so far.

> Hello Fajar,
> 
> I would like to say hello and get in contact with you.
> 
> Michael from IPFire.org told me that you may have some requirements or
> ideas for an improved update accelerator, cause we plan to extend the
> current version (at this point it look like a complete rewrite o_O)
> 
> So how is your current situation?
> It would be great if you can give some details of your current system,
> your users, for what you use the update accelerator, the kind of files
> you currently store and the space it currently used.
> 
> What could be improved or changed in an upcoming version?
> What is disturbing you at moment?
> 
> To share the ideas & requirements I've added a Wiki-Page on
> wiki.ipfire.org, where Ideas & current problems could be shared URL:
> http://wiki.ipfire.org/en/development/update-accelerator

Please move this to the "new" development area over here:

http://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/proxy/update-accelerator

The pages in /en/development are pretty outdated or wrong. We also
wanted to move the development stuff away from the part of the wiki that
is translated, because development documentation is not worth the
translation because of the limited amount of people who are reading it.

-Michael

Fwd: Update-Accelerator 3.0

[Jörn-Ingo Weigert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1022 bytes --]

@Devel: You are also welcome to share some ideas for upcoming version
of update-accelerator



Hello Fajar,

I would like to say hello and get in contact with you.

Michael from IPFire.org told me that you may have some requirements or
ideas for an improved update accelerator, cause we plan to extend the
current version (at this point it look like a complete rewrite o_O)

So how is your current situation?
It would be great if you can give some details of your current system,
your users, for what you use the update accelerator, the kind of files
you currently store and the space it currently used.

What could be improved or changed in an upcoming version?
What is disturbing you at moment?

To share the ideas & requirements I've added a Wiki-Page on
wiki.ipfire.org, where Ideas & current problems could be shared URL:
http://wiki.ipfire.org/en/development/update-accelerator

It would be great if you can participate to build a great new version!

Kind regards,

Joern-Ingo Weigert
Community Developer IPFire.org