Hi,
How can I hide proxy headers for v4.0b3 or v3.24?

***************************************
HTTP_VIA=1.1 192.168.103.254 (Mikrotik HttpProxy)
HTTP_X_FORWARDED_FOR=192.168.103.22
HTTP_X_PROXY_ID=2048360444
***************************************

no way

yeah that would be nice to edit squid.conf

I think, it's not about Squid but about RouterOS Web-Proxy

I think, it's not about Squid but about RouterOS Web-Proxy

do you mean, routerOS web-proxy is not squid ?

it was squid in 2.9.x, 3.x uses mikrotik proxy :)

it was squid in 2.9.x, 3.x uses mikrotik proxy

that is brave,really,making own proxy server when there is a real cool one.
then we should be waiting for some unexpected cool features =]

umm, most of RouterOs features are made by Mikrotik. so you want to say - it's brave to make our own OS ?

umm, most of RouterOs features are made by Mikrotik. so you want to say - it's brave to make our own OS ?

indeed i do!
using squid is easy/safe, modifying it,is still OK, but writing own.....

it was squid in 2.9.x, 3.x uses mikrotik proxy

that is brave,really,making own proxy server when there is a real cool one.
then we should be waiting for some unexpected cool features =]

You mean like Gmail complaining of not cacheing cookies if you go trough Mikrotik proxy and alike? Is there a way to properly handle those cookies?

nejc

it was squid in 2.9.x, 3.x uses mikrotik proxy

that is brave,really,making own proxy server when there is a real cool one.
then we should be waiting for some unexpected cool features =]

You mean like Gmail complaining of not cacheing cookies if you go trough Mikrotik proxy and alike? Is there a way to properly handle those cookies?

nejc

if i knew it,it wouldn't be unexpected

Thanks for all replies...

Maybe we can use this feature next releases

Any news about this topic?

Some websites checking http_x_forward headers. My some clients cant connect to this websites.

can or will it 1 day be able to cache video streams like squide


can mikrotik add this to there proxy?

squid can't do it. some hacks are required, which break HTTP standards. we could look into it, but it's a mess.

look what is written on the Squid docs site:

Some private modifications of squid have apparently achieved youtube.com caching. However, there is presently no simple solution available to the general public.

To cache youtube.com files, you will need to enable caching of dynamic content and some other measures, which technically break the HTTP standards.

BUT!!! THER IS A PLUGGIN!


VideoCache - Cache Videos Using Squid

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Videocache is a Squid URL rewriter plugin written in Python for bandwidth optimization while browsing famous video sharing portals/websites like Youtube, Metacafe etc. It helps you save bandwidth when a particular video is requested more than once from the same network/machine.

Squid can not cache the videos served dynamically. Videocache fits into squid to help it cache the videos as well. The cached videos are stored on your server's local hard disk and you can browse them as if you downloaded them. You can copy them to other machines as well.


HERE IS A LINK

http://cachevideos.com/

I know, but read AGAIN what I posted. It breaks HTTP standards and is not official. Plus, we don't use squid anyway, we would have to make our own HTTP breaking thing.

oh i see


well it would be nice to have this kind of thing working on mikrotik web proxy
becouse its simple

to work with!
there is one other thing with webproxy in version 3.27

but it s a winbox problem

had a reply some time back but have had no feed back i know use are busy

but look into this for me!
[Ticket#2009070866000155] [Ticket#2009070866000155]
thanks again for the support

to make our own HTTP breaking thing

MikroTikls, you're the best

to make our own HTTP breaking thing

so is mikrotik going to look into making there own HTTP breaking thing?

if so please keep use informed on this topic

I think that the "hiding/breaking thing" would be a great thing

There is no need to advertise what system you have.
If you can't remove all then at least remove... Then people can't check sites like http://www.lagado.com/proxy-test to see what I am running...
In school environments you tend not to want to show so much...

Then you can have a check box to activate it under the web-proxy. That way people can choose to or not to use it.

Beside this it's an excellent proxy! Slim and fast!

If the Mikrotik team is Looking AT

to make our own HTTP breaking thing

can thay mabe add in an option to the proxy to allow"or do" somthing like this?????

add action=allow comment=1 disabled=no path=*.exe Rx Max Limit=512k Tx Max Limit=512k
add action=allow comment=1 disabled=no path=*.rar Rx Max Limit=256k Tx Max Limit=256k
add action=allow comment=1 disabled=no path=*.zip Rx Max Limit=300k Tx Max Limit=300k
add action=allow comment=1 disabled=no path=*.mp3 Rx Max Limit=128k Tx Max Limit=128k
add action=allow comment="" disabled=no path=*.wav Rx Max Limit=56k Tx Max Limit=56k

Standards and protocols are just old information on pieces of paper on some dusty shelves. Just BREAK the standard to satisfy the customers, after that - publish it as your own RFC, your own standard. This is how IT ACTUALLY ALREADY WORKS.

to make our own HTTP breaking thing

MikroTikls, you're the best

I love them. When the routers work, at least

I think that the "hiding/breaking thing" would be a great thing

There is no need to advertise what system you have.
If you can't remove all then at least remove...

Code: Select all

HTTP_VIA=1.1 192.168.1xx.2xx (Mikrotik HttpProxy)
HTTP_VIA=1.1 192.168.1xx.2xx

Then people can't check sites like http://www.lagado.com/proxy-test to see what I am running...
In school environments you tend not to want to show so much...

Then you can have a check box to activate it under the web-proxy. That way people can choose to or not to use it.

Beside this it's an excellent proxy! Slim and fast!

I agree.

Normis is this something MikroTik will look into or is it case closed?

we have no plans to make such advanced proxy features, RouterOS is still primarily a router. you can use parent-proxy feature and do your youtube caching there

Okay My primary concern was more security related. Not to give off to much info.
I agree it's not intended as a UTM box My thoughts was perhaps something to test in the v4 beta... if it was not to much afford to make it.

I personally use it as a transparent proxy without caching... Just for the HTTP security feature.

Anyhow now I know

thats true but mikrotik has a x86 option for os

and its easyer woeking with 1 os then 6 or 7 diffrent os

to run 1 system

so if i had x86 box for my proxy

and x86 for my routing

then that means i have 2 boxes running mikrotik

easyer to folt find if there is a problem

anything is possable

its just the time it take to do things!

That is also true, There are definitely more things that the proxy provide beside security.
It's just in my case more interesting to do security when we don't have a capacity issue. That's all...

I think if it is possible to have a separate package that implements more advanced proxy features would have been great.
However I can understand Normis/MikroTik's view on the matter, It's still foremost a router... Beside how many "routers" have proxy and all the special functions that RouterOS have? I mean take a look at Cisco

But as I wrote before if they can make these features easy then it would be great, That I think we all can agree on.
If not in this version then perhaps in the v4.0 when it is released.