Search squid archive

Re: Re: transparent (intercepting?) without wccp, options?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 04.07.2012 15:54, Ezequiel Birman wrote:
"Eliezer" == Eliezer Croitoru <eliezer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

<snip>

No problem, I've used bind before. Sorry to ask this on squid-users but
did anyone try pdnsd (http://members.home.nl/p.a.rombouts/pdnsd/),
pdns-recursor, dnsmasq (not sure if it caches/recurses), djbdns, dnrd, unbound, yadifa or others? I ask because maybe a full-blown DNS server
is not needed this time.

I'm aware of people using dnsmasq, djbdns and pdnsd. Have not heard of the others, thank you for the tidbits.

The resolver does not matter as long as it performs recursive DNS properly. Both Squid and the client will be sending it DNS packets as their interface.



    >>
>> > using this setup you can test settings very easily on part of
    >> the > clients or test computer.
    >>
>> > for network usage analysis you can use ntop, it also gives p2p
    >> and > other protocols detection.
    >>
    >> I am trying it right now, nice!
    >>
    >> > so the setup i propose is not from your list:
    >>
    >> > 5) wan1---+--------+ +------------+ | >
    >> RV042 |---|squid\bridge|--switch-+--[lan clients] >
    >> wan2---+--------+ +------------+
    >>
>> > - RV042 = LB and wan gatway. - squid = brdige + NTOP + p2p >
    >> block\throttling + http cache
    >>
    >> Thanks, I am giving it a try.
    >>
    >> I'll start by following
    >>
    >>

http://wiki.squid-cache.org/ConfigExamples/Intercept/DebianWithRedirectorAndReporting
    >>
> this is a good way to start but it wont be a transparent proxy but > a "nat" proxy but it can be good for your needs as anyway you have
    > nat in the RV042.

Are you sure? The only mention to nat in is in order to redirect port 80
to 3128 on squid box. This is the intro:

Yes. There are 4 protocol layers involved.
ebtables - rules stops it being a bridge "transparent relay/proxy" and makes it routed traffic. iptables - rules use NAT (interception proxy) instead of TPROXY (transparent proxy). squid - config file uses URL-rewriters to prevent Squid being a HTTP protocol "transparent proxy" (HTTP definition of "transparent proxy" is the Squid default behaviour).

There is a lot of people confused by the meaning of the word "transparent". With good reason, it has been used out of context so much.


"This document (based on this article[1] with some updates and
additions) explains how to put into production a Bridge device running a Squid interception web proxy on a Linux Debian 6 system. Since the proxy is performing transparent interception, LAN users are able to surf the web without having to set manually the proxy address in their browser.

This document also details how to set up a few useful features such as
web filtering (via Squirm) and usage monitoring (via SARG).

First of all, you need a Linux box with two network interfaces that
we'll set up as a bridge. We'll assume that eth0 is connected downstream
to the LAN, while eth1 provides upstream access to the Internet."


    >> which seems similar to what i am trying to achive. If I am
    >> mistaken, please let me know.
    >>
    >> and also most of http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Features/Tproxy4
    > tproxy will ggive you the benefit of some graphing tools with a
    > more accurate vision on your clients requests.


    > update me

    > Regards, Eliezer
    >>
>> > things you should consider about pfsense and ClearOS: - they do >> > have nice web interface but lack updated software. - they take >> up > from your machine more then you need. - they leave you in
    >> the big > cloud of "what to h### happen when i did apply???"
    >>
>> > about accessing the squid in this setup the box is behind nat >> so > it's ok and if you will every decide that you want the squid >> to > take over the RV042 LB and dhcp you can just use iptables to >> block > access to squid port or bind squid only to local net port >> and > of-course the basic way of acls to allow only local users
    >> access.
    >>
>> > about content filtering: i prefer to use squidguard and not > >> danshguardian. there always the option of using some icap server
    >> > such as qlprpxy.

A quick google search tends to favor dansguardian. Why do you prefer
squidguard? Is it still being developed?



SG is an internal helper. Access controls are written in squid.conf only. Squid passes it a limited amount of data to work with and manipulates the HTTP request based on the response.

DG is a proxy separate from Squid. With access controls being written in one or the other, sometimes both.


Amos


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Samba]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Linux USB]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux