TCP_REFRESH_HIT a MISS

Hi,

I have a question concerning the HIT \/ MISS of a few things.

1) A TCP_REFRESH_HIT in my log files always results in a contact to the
origin site. I may be willing to count the IMS exchange with a result of
TCP_REFRESH_HIT/304 a HIT, but a TCP_REFRESH_HIT/200 transfered the
complete object from elsewhere. Why is it logged as TCP_REFRESH_HIT when
it is, in fact, a MISS? What is the big difference compared with a
TCP_REFRESH_MISS, then?

... TCP_REFRESH_HIT/200 1249 GET http://techno.ics.at/images/punkt.gif -
DIRECT/195.179.151.8 image/gif

2) In some older log files (2.1p2) I saw a "TCP_HIT/301 ... DIRECT/..."
Since the destination site was obviously contacted to get the "moved
permanently", why was is logged as a HIT? It seems to be fixed in
2.2s4+hno-990713 (it also seemed to be one symptom of fwd loops). It is
now correctly logged as NONE, if it was a HIT...

3) For the developers: Is it possible to express the parent/sibling
relationship configured in squid.conf appropriately in the log file for
cache digest hits, e.g. log a CD_(PARENT|PEER)_HIT?

Le deagh dh�rachd,
Dipl.-Ing. Jens-S. V�ckler (voeckler@rvs.uni-hannover.de)
Institute for Computer Networks and Distributed Systems
University of Hanover, Germany; +49 511 762 4726
Received on Wed Aug 04 1999 - 01:23:50 MDT