Re: Cisco Cache Director (Was RE: Does Squid beat the rest? )

>>> "James R Grinter" wrote
> Your system is context switching for every DNS lookup, if you think
> about it.

That's what a second CPU is good for - that, and the ftpgets and the
operating system.

> What would be a worthwhile development is to use Darren
> Reed's arlib to perform asynchronous DNS lookups. I think this might
> actually be in the 1.2 track.

Either arlib, or something like it.

> But I think Cisco are lining themselves up against Netscape's proxy,
> with that statement. Netscape's proxy still runs a process per
> connection, I believe.

As far as a comparision of Netscape vs. Cisco proxies, the Cisco one
is the far superior. I just don't think it's anywhere near Squid (or
Harvest/Netcache)

> There are also a lot of sites out there still running CERN httpd for their
> proxy

AOL still used a hacked CERN last time I looked.

> [snip]
> These are the people that are targets for
> this sort of product - plug in and forget.

That and the NT sites, who _want_ a point'n'drool system.

The other reason sites might install it - as well as transparent proxying,
it offers centralised filtering of URLs. This would appeal to sites who
want to be able to filter, but with the minimum of pain (well, ok, the
cost of the 7500 router and the cisco cache engine could be considered pain,
but that's not what I meant).

Anthony
Received on Sun Sep 21 1997 - 11:29:36 MDT