Connect. Communicate. Collaborate. Securely.

Home » Kerio User Forums » Kerio Control » HTTP Cache - It shows "not cacheable" all the time
  •  
leodf

Messages: 16
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Hi guys (and ladies... it may have one around).

We have a limited internet traffic over here, and I was trying to reduce the download from internet and turned on the cache options.

After a full day I was checking the local website of Kerio Firewall and found out that only 0,01MB was being used, around 30 files were on cache.

Then I turned on the DEBUG for Http Cache and got thousands of the following information:

[24/Oct/2006 08:29:47] {cache} 9162 not cacheable: us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/pim/f/blko1.gif

all URLs were being ignored by the cache with this "not cacheable" information... and I tryed all the configurations on the Cache Tab, the Help file, the Forum and also the "Oraculo" (google)...

did anyone have this same problem and got a solution ?
or any idea about what I should try to solve it ?


Just to let things clear, here are the configurations:

x Enable cache on transparent proxy
x Enable cache on proxy server
HTTP Protocol TTL: 7 day(s)
Cache directory: g:\Kerio\Cache (NTFS)
Cache Size: 1024 MB
Max. HTTP object size: 30000 MB
(weird, there is no memory size settings according to the help file on the tab)

Cache Options:
all clear, I tried some but then I unmarked all ítens here.

By the way, the KWF's version I'm using is 6.2.2 build 1746 on a Windows Server 2003 SP2


Thanks in advance to all
take care
and big hugs

Leo
  •  
winkelman

Messages: 2119
Karma: 3
Send a private message to this user
Websties can themselves inform proxies/browsers (through HTML-tags) if their pages are cacheable (and if so, for how long) or not. Perhaps most websites these days state that they are not cacheable? Websites do update and change all the time these days (think of changing banners or rapidly changing content), so those sites are not really cacheable.

[Updated on: Mon, 30 October 2006 17:06]

  •  
leodf

Messages: 16
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Hey .. thanks for replying.

I suspected about this "no cache" option you can put on meta strings in the html files.

But there is an option on Kerio that says "ignore server Cache-Control directives" and this should ignore the "not cacheable" meta instruction.

We as a local network administrator should have the right to decide what can be or not used from the cache, most of gifs, jpegs, flashs files are not changed that often, I agree with banners, but I'm not worried if my users get an "old banner".
And about the content, there is the personalized TTL there.

I just want to decrease the montly traffic demand.

Two weeks with the "cache" turned on had only 0.3MB of files cached, I think all websites have the follow two commands:

[meta http-equiv=pragma content=no-cache]
[meta http-equiv=expires content="Mon, 06 Jan 1990 00:00:01 GMT"]

That's sad .. because we should decide what is "renewed" or not, I agree with this information be used on browsers, but I think my IE also ignore cache directives on most gif/jpg/swf...

Well... I'll let the idea to Kerio developers to permit the firewall use or not this "no cache" string.

Thanks for getting into the discussion.
Take care

Leo
  •  
leodf

Messages: 16
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Just to let you know how expensive is an extra traffic:

we pay R$0.10 for each extra MEGABYTE, that's around US$0.045/MB

We have a bandwidth of 8Mbits that let us spend 60GB of traffic (download + upload) for R$209,90 (US$99).

Last month we had 60GB + 1378MB, it made us pay an extra of US$65 on extra traffic and the next internet package is not worth for us because it's a lot more expensive that the one we have now.

that's the reason I was trying to find a solution to decrease traffic, besides I've been blocking a lot of stuffs, including banners.

If you have any idea about how to help on this issue .. I'll be a lot glad and I'll show you the city and the girls if you come to Brazil one day hehehe...

Take care
  •  
Nixs

Messages: 159
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
At our site, we block .FLV's and a few other file types that take up a ton of bandwidth but have no benefit.

Depends on what type of a site you have. Might also block .MP3, and other similar file types. If you have antivirus software updating directly from the internet you might setup a local distribution server. If you have Windows doing automatic updates to the Internet, you might setup a local WSUS server so you only have to download the updates ONCE and point your clients to the WSUS server.
  •  
leodf

Messages: 16
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Hei Nixs,

how are you doing man .. ?

Thanks for the tips .. I was reading about the WSUS and I don't think this idea fits here on my network.

We are a group of students (a lot of them) that share a few internet links to reduce costs, so, the computers can't be restricted, and that's include putting them on a domain.

At Microsoft's website I was reading the documentation and it says I need to set up the local policy to apply the "redirection" of the windows update connections to the server, and I can't do that Sad because the computers are not on a domain.

I can't set up anything on the clients computer and block the flash videos isn't a good idea either.

I was trying to find a cache system that ignore the "no cache" string from the servers and I didn't find a single one, the programers do respect the will of the website administrators.

That's unfair because I don't need to cache the asp/php/html/jsp ... just the video/audio/image was enough.

But thanks for your comment, and take care.

Leo
  •  
zar136

Messages: 1
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Sleep my friend
No body care Mad
I have same problem but I do not have solutions yet!
I tried winroute with win XP, Windows server 2003 and its the same, I tried "ignore server Cache-Control directives" Not functional choise!!


have solution?
will not answer me (sure)!
Previous Topic: bridge 2 network cards ?
Next Topic: Dynamic IP error
Goto Forum:
  


Disclaimer:
Kerio discussion forums are intended for open communication between forum members and may contain information and material posted by members which may be useful in learning about Kerio products. The discussion forums are not intended to provide technical support for any specific product. Any information implied or expressed in the discussion forums is that of the posting member. Kerio is in no way responsible for the information posted in the forums, or its accuracy. Kerio employees may participate in the discussions, but their postings do not represent an offical position of the company on any issues raised or discussed. Kerio reserves the right to monitor and maintain the forums to promote free and accurate exchange of information.

Current Time: Tue Nov 21 14:53:26 CET 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00396 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.
Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.4.