Verizon transparent web caching issue? WASRe: Data Center QoS equipment breaking http 1.1?

up at 3.am up at 3.am
Fri Jul 31 19:02:07 CDT 2009


Disregard my disregard.  The problem resurfaced with no changes on my 
part.  I purged browser caches and tried them from 3 browsers and each 
time:

http://www.countytheater.org

redirected to:  http://webmail.ns3.pil.net/ which is another NameVhost on 
that server sharing that IP.  This is incorrect.  However, I then switch 
from a Verizon connection to an ATT 3g connection on the IPhone and the 
problem goes away.

Has anyone heard of upstream transparent caching issues causing this kind 
of problem?  Does anyone else here get the redirect instead of the correct 
page?

TIA

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, up at 3.am wrote:

>
> Please disregard this idiocy of mine...it appears that the Apache 
> UseCanonicalName directive selectively breaks some NameVirtualHosts, while 
> leaving others unscathed, but turning it off fixed it anyway.
>
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, up at 3.am wrote:
>
>> 
>> Sorry if this is a little OT, but we're seeing a serious problem and was 
>> wondering if it is what I think it is.
>> 
>> In short: I have been moving services off of our servers in a data center 
>> onto a server at eSecuredata, who rents dedicated servers.  The idea is to 
>> lower costs and eliminate having to deal with hardware.
>> 
>> The advertise "unmetered bandwidth", but mention QoS measure to control 
>> "bandwidth hogs".
>> 
>> One of my customers, whose site I just moved from a unique IP virtual host 
>> on my old server onto an Apache NameVirtualHost on the new one, worked fine 
>> at first.  Then today, they started complaining about getting one of our 
>> home pages.  I figured DNS or web caching issues, until I started seeing it 
>> for myself.  It was no caching issue, it was NameVirtualHost breaking.
>> 
>> I poured over my configs (I've done this config countless times), and saw 
>> this in the apache docs:
>> 
>> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/vhosts/name-based.html
>> 
>> " Some operating systems and network equipment implement bandwidth 
>> management techniques that cannot differentiate between hosts unless they 
>> are on separate IP addresses."
>> 
>> So, I installed lynx on the server, and sure enough, it worked perfectly 
>> fine there, just not from anywhere outside eSecuredata's network that I 
>> could see.
>> 
>> Can anyone shed any light on this particular practice, of this company in 
>> particular?
>> 
>> thanks
>> 
>> James Smallacombe		      PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
>> up at 3.am 
>> http://3.am
>> =========================================================================
>> 
>
> James Smallacombe		      PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
> up at 3.am							    http://3.am
> =========================================================================
>
>

James Smallacombe		      PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
up at 3.am							    http://3.am
=========================================================================




More information about the NANOG mailing list