RE: [squid-users] Looks like cookie set up browser issue but it is not

Henrik,

I am just wonder why it is always WORKING with Squid2.4STABLE7.
There is no issue at all connecting to that server when Squid2.4STABLE7
is in use.

Regards,
nooshin

-----Original Message-----
From: Henrik Nordstrom [mailto:hno@squid-cache.org]=20
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 5:47 PM
To: Zand, Nooshin
Cc: squid-users@squid-cache.org
Subject: RE: [squid-users] Looks like cookie set up browser issue but it
is not


On Sat, 24 Apr 2004, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

> I will continue looking into this for some time as it interests me why
> this site dislikes being proxied when there should not be any
difference. =20
> If it was a http site I could understand, but not in case of https.

So far the conclusions is that this server is quite broken and I am=20
suprised it at all works.

* Most times (but not always) works when accessed directly using
Mozilla
* Always fails when accessed via Squid
* Always fails when accessed by lynx
* Always fails when accessed by Konqueror
* Fails immediately when accessed using openssl s_client
* Fails differently when using s_client but waiting 1 second after
sending the request line before sending request headers..

I have not yet fully concluded why it most times works when using
Mozilla=20
directly but never when accessed via Squid. From what I can see it
should=20
fail when accessed directly as well, but appears not. I can only assume=20
there is some subtle timing difference or similar as the s_client test=20
indicates the server is very sensitive to timing that in terms of HTTP=20
should not have any meaning at all.

The odd thing is however that little or none of these timing differences

is present when going via Squid vs going direct.. still a mystery what=20
this server is doing or reacting upon. But one thing is certain, this=20
server is extremely fragile and is not working the way it is supposed
to.

Regards
Henrik