Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Caching proxy?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by lschafroth View Post
    then stop working on the WINDOWS VERSION!!! hehe

    Lannie
    YES!!!

    However, I must admit the thing has potential.

    But, back on topic.

    How many users are present on the average network that people here want the proxy for?
    Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP, Microsoft Certified: Azure Administrator Associate
    NexgenAppliances.com
    Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
    Email: [email protected]

    Comment


    • #77
      Hmm. I work for a school district in CA. Does 20,000 users, 8,000 computers, spread out over 30 sites in 2 cities with fiber connections all coming back to our district office sound good to you?

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by MaximumOD View Post
        Hmm. I work for a school district in CA. Does 20,000 users, 8,000 computers, spread out over 30 sites in 2 cities with fiber connections all coming back to our district office sound good to you?
        Certainly, but that is what I expect is common.

        The licensing for Untangle stops at 151+ user bucket. It does so because the software is only meant for networks that serve less than 200 people. Untangle is a small business product.

        It is a testament to the product that it can be adapted to work for networks of that scope. But, it is not officially supporting that market. And, you know as well as I, that it needs worlds of work to be a complete product for a network of that scope.

        Heck, with the 10k concurrent session limit, and the immediate lack of 64bit support to give the linux kernel enough ram to push that hard... we're all effectively locked in to 2000 users or less.

        Many have said, how can Untangle afford to simply turn away this business? But those that espouse that sentiment don't understand the limitations of business. Untangle has built themselves into a small business service machine, and they cannot support Enterprise class consumers directly.

        I get referrals in this bracket, because I do help people get Untangle units working in networks of that scope. But the product may never be ready for real direct deployment of that scale.
        Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP, Microsoft Certified: Azure Administrator Associate
        NexgenAppliances.com
        Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
        Email: [email protected]

        Comment


        • #79
          I see. Thank you for the clarification.

          Comment


          • #80
            I'm with everyone else here - I'd love to see a web caching proxy appliance added, a free Web Caching app specifically. I'm a small business consultant and have been adding Untangle to Sites for the past year or so and love the product, its an absolutely amazing piece of work.

            I have several sites that I cant migrate to UT due to the web cache issue, they have slow connections and without the web cache they'd be over bandwidth quotas every month.

            I've allready voted for the web-cache bug.. but +1 for web cache :-)

            Comment


            • #81
              I know this web cache would benefit but think that the firewall is suppose to be just a firewall but a complete UTM . If you need UTM based untangle does pretty better then any other UTM on the market. Bottom line is web cache are not suitable for UTM since it might cause some problems in background. Like sky said it would be better to use in dedicated pc since the pressure on UT will be less and would benefit you on small business network . I have pfsense behind UT in which pfsense does squid job and Untangle does web filtering and protocol blocking. we also have enabled captive portal. so far it is running smoothly .

              Comment


              • #82
                Disagree

                I have to disagree there.. UTM can and should include a web cache. You can go back and forth on what should and shouldnt be included in a UTM environment, or a firewall for that matter. Its becoming quite common for Router / Firewalls to include advanced functions including features normally dedicated to a UTM.

                I think one of the coolest (albiet expensive) features of the new Cisco integrated services routers is virtualization. Cisco has small business/branch office routers that allow you to integrate Route/Switch/Firewall/IPS AND has the ability to run full blown Windows server virtual machines (inside the 1U routers for services such as branch office replication and Active Directory services).

                Branch offices and Small businesses need integrated solutions that work well and are tightly integrated. While it might be great to use the model of 1 server for each function the Untangle story shows that it isnt necessary. CPU/RAM and HD space is cheap - throw a web cache in there and lets add another killer feature to Untangle.

                Comment


                • #83
                  THAT would depend on the dev. They know what is the best for us

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    So... do what Cisco did...

                    Build an inexpensive ESXi server, put UT and PFSense into a VM, and toss in some windows or whatever else while you're at it.

                    I'm actually in the process of building an inexpensive solution that has ESXi, OpenFiler, and a switch all in one box for that very reason.

                    And, I think I need to point out once again. I'm not a dev, I'm simply a reseller and a regular peon on these forums just like the rest of you guys. The little ribbon on my name was a reward for incessant forum spam!
                    Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP, Microsoft Certified: Azure Administrator Associate
                    NexgenAppliances.com
                    Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
                    Email: [email protected]

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Skynight - I'd love to get involved with what you are doing there for ESXi, I manage and maintain a full ESX cluster at work (I'm a part time consultant) with 15 ESX Hosts and its an amazing platform.

                      If you need any assistance of would like to work on that platform let me know - its an amazing piece of technology. UT + Squid + File\Print\Exchange Email on 1 box via ESX would be killer.

                      Thanks,
                      Andrew

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        That it is... but back on topic.

                        The largest issue I see with the proxy is that Untangle isn't a client of itself. All communications that come from Untangle directly simply aren't subject to the rack. Because of this limitation having a proxy directly within the UT install is going to take some serious work. There was a group of people here trying to pull it off... and they got the proxy to work but I don't believe the proxy was being properly filtered.

                        I'm no code monkey... so I don't even know where to start on implementing this internally.
                        Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP, Microsoft Certified: Azure Administrator Associate
                        NexgenAppliances.com
                        Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
                        Email: [email protected]

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          how can i use ESXi , could some one guide me ?

                          I need windows, untangle, squid and a email server .

                          My server specification is

                          3.2 Ghz dual core
                          3.5 Gb ram
                          160 gb hard disk
                          2 NIC

                          can it support ?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by PimpSel View Post
                            ...

                            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..
                            Maybe the c't off line updater is something for you.
                            It handles all current OS and Office. See: xxx.heise.de/ct/projekte/Offline-Update-284105.html The page is in German, but Google translate will help you a long way. English forum at: xxx.h-online.com/security/forum/S-Offline-Update/forum-108322/list/ (replace xxx with www, due to min post limit)

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Hey, I have tried to delve into this issue.

                              I would like to take a crack at developing this feature.

                              I would like to make it transparent, but allow the interface to opt in ports for the proxy. This way traffic can be routed specifically into the proxy based on port. If the proxy was put inline with the rest of the traffic flow would this not be possible while maintaining the untangle module ethic? I don't want to make this sound trivial, but if there has been any progress made I would love to see it and lend a hand. if not I would like to spend a few cycles seeing if there is an elegant way to accomplish this.

                              Any tips/suggestions from those in the know with untangle at how you would go about cracking this nut?

                              Thanks,
                              -Alex

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                I've been a big VM'er for years... BUT NOW it's CITRIX

                                I've been a big VM'er for years... and vmware had rocked the house for a long time. However, when I couldn't get a ESXi server installed on current hardware I started looking around (Tyann 1366 socket MB with a PERC 5i). Since Citrix now gives away the XEN product along with an AWESOME console to go with it, I gave it a good look and try. Yes, the Citrix Xen product worked on my hardware (server grade hardware now) where ESXi did not. Also, if you used a shared storage location (ISCSI or NFS), the Citrix product GIVES YOU (for FREE!) a V-Motion comparable product included with the console... so you can move live servers between VM Hosts without paying vmware's high prices.

                                I've been using CloneZilla's boot CD to create images (after removing VMware's tools) and then re-loading those images inside of the Xen VM... and it's been working great.

                                Just a thought.....
                                Scott


                                Originally posted by whatuusay1 View Post
                                Skynight - I'd love to get involved with what you are doing there for ESXi, I manage and maintain a full ESX cluster at work (I'm a part time consultant) with 15 ESX Hosts and its an amazing platform.

                                If you need any assistance of would like to work on that platform let me know - its an amazing piece of technology. UT + Squid + File\Print\Exchange Email on 1 box via ESX would be killer.

                                Thanks,
                                Andrew

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X