Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 119

Thread: Caching proxy?

  1. #1
    Untangler rasqual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    55

    Default Caching proxy?

    Any prospect of that coming anytime soon?

    I mean, c'mon. No one can tell me that wouldn't be a tres cool accoutrement for this thing.

    I'm still in the honeymoon stage with Untangle, and it's quite a honeymoon. Thanks for bringing this product to market.

  2. #2
    Untangle Junkie dmorris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    San Carlos, CA
    Posts
    17,747

    Default

    Glad you like it!

    We definitely think a web cacher would be cool.

    What we are trying to evaluate is the saving actually to be had by implementing one. Modern browsers do quite a bit a caching on a per user basis, so significant savings only happen on very large networks.

    Although if we could figure out a way to just plug in squid
    Attention: Support and help on the Untangle Forums is provided by volunteers and community members like yourself.
    If you need Untangle support please call or email support@untangle.com

  3. #3
    Untangler rasqual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmorris View Post
    Although if we could figure out a way to just plug in squid
    Right!

    One place where the advantage is realized well before "large" numbers, is in education. Frequently, an entire lab full of students is doing the same thing under instruction. This is one case where caching would absolutely be of benefit.

    Keep up the good work.

  4. #4
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1

    Default Great !

    I've been testdriving your product and I like it, very much.. the only reason we're not implementing it as of now, is because of the lack of a caching proxy server..

    We own a computer assembly / repair / service centre and we have one broadband pipe with contractual 40 GB /month limit. Currently we are using a transparent caching proxy server and we consume about 30 GB/ month, thanks to the proxy.. and this without recreational browsing, no peer to peer transfers.. VPN access, e-mail and various updates (Microsoft products, antiviral products) are the only traffic going in and out.

    Without this cache, our contract would not be sufficient..

    It is easy to understand to which extent a proxy greatly reduces traffic in our environment.. Just imagine how much updates freshly installed windows boxes and their antiviral products retreive.. Our own machines get updated via an internal wsus server and symantec enterprise, these however can not be (easily) used for updating our customer's machines..

    We have an average of 15 to 20 freshly installed new or refurbished pc's a day, multiply this by the tremendous amount of updates, service packs, and you've got an idea what kind of traffic this creates..

    Any ideas when this option will be implemented?

    Keep up the good work,

    PimpSel

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3

    Default Forward proxy

    I personally think the easiest step here is a forward proxy (cache_peer).
    That way I can still have a squid caching proxy running (with whatever complex squid rules I want) and it doesn't complicate matters for untangle. I don't think introducing squid into untangle will stick in line with its easy of use for newbies etc.
    Having a forwarding proxy could also be the first step to installing squid on the untangle box and then having a few checkboxes to cache data etc.
    I've been using ipcop and whilst it doesn't touch untangle it does allow me to forward to a proxy and this then gives me more control on my web traffic/

  6. #6
    Untangle Junkie dmorris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    San Carlos, CA
    Posts
    17,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crab View Post
    I personally think the easiest step here is a forward proxy (cache_peer).
    That way I can still have a squid caching proxy running (with whatever complex squid rules I want) and it doesn't complicate matters for untangle. I don't think introducing squid into untangle will stick in line with its easy of use for newbies etc.
    Having a forwarding proxy could also be the first step to installing squid on the untangle box and then having a few checkboxes to cache data etc.
    I've been using ipcop and whilst it doesn't touch untangle it does allow me to forward to a proxy and this then gives me more control on my web traffic/
    hmm.. so you would suggest having the untangle box transparently catch port 80 traffic and send it through an explicit proxy?
    seems like a pretty good idea
    Attention: Support and help on the Untangle Forums is provided by volunteers and community members like yourself.
    If you need Untangle support please call or email support@untangle.com

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmorris View Post
    hmm.. so you would suggest having the untangle box transparently catch port 80 traffic and send it through an explicit proxy?
    seems like a pretty good idea
    Ye something along those lines. I was thinking that you could chain it in a rack with web filtering. So you could send to an upstreaming proxy before or after webfiltering.
    This would enable users who already have a squid caching solution to carry on and also allow us to poll up to a security proxy.

    For built-in caching it should simply be a case of having a build of squid listening on 3128 or similar on the localhost. A couple of config options could allow you to reconfigure your squid run and I think it would be extremely importrant to include bypasses (intranet sites etc) that you don't wish to use your proxy server.

    Maybe even open up the squid.conf for advanced users.

  8. #8
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8

    Default

    You can try to build an Update accelerator first. This would be a BOMB!

    Imagine, being able to cache:

    Windows, Linux, and Application updates such as Symantec, McAfee, etc.

    This would help save bandwidth consumption.

    Think about it.

    Dennis

    Quote Originally Posted by dmorris View Post
    Glad you like it!

    We definitely think a web cacher would be cool.

    What we are trying to evaluate is the saving actually to be had by implementing one. Modern browsers do quite a bit a caching on a per user basis, so significant savings only happen on very large networks.

    Although if we could figure out a way to just plug in squid

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3

    Default Chaining squid and untangle

    If you want to use Squid to cache and untangle to filter, you could configure untangle as the default gateway for your squid box. Granted, this doesn't help you if you're trying to do this without touching the client configurations, but it can work well in an environment like mine, where I already have an explicit proxy in place, and block outbound ports 80 and 443 from my DHCP pool addresses to force users to use it.

  10. #10
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    13

    Default Proxy Server Holding up Implementations

    The Proxy Server feature is holding up several implementations for me. Currently, I have several hundred workstations configured for an existing firewall w/proxy (port 8080). Without this feature, I can't replace those firewalls with Untangle because I would have to touch all of those computers. No, they are not part of a domain so Group Policies can't be used. Further, when you have 30 or 40 users, the caching proxy filter truly reduces the bandwidth load, especially for "home pages" like MSN and CNN that load every time a user launches IE. When I put the last caching server in, I saw a 30% drop in bandwidth usage over prior usage for 4 months. Caching Proxy Servers work!

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2