Caching proxy?

[Shadow_Knows]

I've only just found out about UT just a few days ago and now have v5.3 running on my home network. Not just 4-5 minutes after getting all of the racks setup - was I looking for squid. I run several CentOS machines and have Squid running in a few test networks right now. Amazingly easy to setup - and can see the benefits almost immediately. Hopefully - an optional RACK can be utilized in such a fashion that users wouldn't have to put in entries into their browsers, IE, Firefox, etc for a specific proxy server address. Having it transparent in the background would ease everyone's installation and likelihood of adaptation. I remember the old days in a large network with Novell's Border Mangler ...errr Border Manager....and setting up proxy addresses gets old after the first 2 machines.

TIA

[dolson11]

I have an enhancement request open on this.
If you want to help pile on the votes for this feature go to
http://bugzilla.untangle.com/show_bug.cgi?id=4015
and vote for “Bug# 4015”

[dolson11]

The Instagate EX2 was a great little box and it would let you choose the size of your transparent cache 0Mb - 500Mb. It is only like a 1.2ghz celeron and a 20gig HD.

It helps saves so much bandwidth for AV updates and windows updates and if I have a class all going to the same webpage !!!!

http://www.whystruggle.com/esoft/dow...EX2_052103.pdf

[priteshvarsani]

You could just put the proxy server behind the Untangle computer ? That should work fine, just set up a bog standard linux/bsd server and install squid to it and your sorted, or with a little more work you can make it transparent as well, but most large networks manually specify a proxy server and do not have a WAN facing default gateway for clients.

I do however think caching should a package within untangles system, as it is especially useful on larger networks and networks that use the internet a lot

[dolson11]

"I do however think caching should a package within untangles system, as it is especially useful on larger networks and networks that use the internet a lot"


I agree it just would be a nice add for networks that use the internet a lot.

[goplaycheckers]

i would PAY for this feature!!!

[sky-knight]

Please don't mention Instagate in here again... I started to have waking nightmares and nearly went into convulsions... the proxy system in that thing was barely functional and didn't work with windows update AT ALL! The blasted thing was the source of constant pain and the customer that owned it just "loved" it. I'm just glad I don't work for them anymore.

[dolson11]

I still have four clients with Instagates and they all work flawlessly. When they die I would like to replace them with untanlge but for the last 4 years they have worked great!!!!

[mdh]

It shouldn't take too much creativity to fix that.

[Compstuff]

This is my 1st post so hello to all... anyway: I was sourcing my hardware and ready to setup a customer with 6 pro systems when I ran across this post about no cache(Squid) DAMN... I rely on SQUID quite heavily so this is a problem for me. I have been using IPCop transparent proxy for years and get about a 40% hit ratio plus I use the adv proxy for updates... this is VERY useful to us.

Until this feature is available am I correct that I can use IPCop behind UT?
UT---->IPCop with UT gateway----->Clients with IPCop gateway