[Server-devel] Fwd: wwwoffle, patched squid+some form of dns

Sat Feb 19 12:28:22 EST 2011

Redirected to list for further input

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "David Van Assche" <dvanassche at gmail.com>
Date: Feb 19, 2011 4:49 PM
Subject: wwwoffle, patched squid+some form of dns
To: <martin at laptop.org>, <team at lists.activitycentral.com>

Thanks for the kind email. Just to give u some background. This really
came from a Paraguay deployment, where they asked if they could
redirect activities.sugarlabs.org to a local server since their net
access is quite internittent. Looking arround  and asking on #bind (boy
are they picky about terminology) I discovered a patch for Squid  that
actually creates 3 states made for internmittent access, no accerss, or
access on demand. The patch to the source is attached in case its of
interest.

The other option was tu use dnsmasq as an alternate DNS manager which
looks far simpler for the guys in the field.

However, if u think using wwwoofle as is, will do what we need (we
would like to make this a product whereby we can add mrore than just
the aforementioned url and contents to a preferably python base gui,
then that's great. Your advice is geatly appreciated.

kind regards,
David Van Assche

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Martin Langhoff <martin at laptop.org>
wrote:

    David,

    if you are going to get a dns and proxy that is patch / configured
    "specially" for offline browsing... you get wwwoffle?

    So I rephrase your question to: should we use wwwoffle or should we
    rewrite wwwoffle?

    I say we use it :-)

    m

    On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:33 PM, David Van Assche
    <dvanassche at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Martin, sorry for briefly
    interrupting you. In your opinion would it be > better to go with
    WWWOffle for capturing offline content in a cache, or > using SQUID
    together with the tri-state patch which allows for 3 kinds of >
    off/online modes. One where Cache has a huge TTL, the other where
    it has non > so everything is always relevant, or a third option
    for intermittent > connections where its the best of both worlds,
    when no net, cache TTL is > maxed out again) and when net comes
    back its at minimal TTL. This sounds > relatively useful to me,
    though the patch, albeit modified in 2010, since > its first
    release in 2001. Obviously a local DNS server would still be >
    necessary to choose which sites to send to the local >
    webserver/backend/whatever solution. For DNS I've heard good things
    about > dnsmasq, and of course BIND9 is the standard.... what are
    your thoughts? > > kind regards, > David Van Assche
    >

    --
     martin at laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
     - ask interesting questions
     - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
     - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/server-devel/attachments/20110219/6c7f62a9/attachment.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN">
<html><head>
<title>404 Not Found</title>
</head><body>
<h1>Not Found</h1>
<p>The requested URL /~dancer/patches/squid-tristate-offline-patch-1.0.txt was not found on this server.</p>
<hr>
<address>Apache/2.2.9 (Debian) PHP/5.2.6-1+lenny9 with Suhosin-Patch mod_python/3.3.1 Python/2.5.2 Server at www.linuxchix.org Port 80</address>
</body></html>