the web proxy with mikrotik now is very simple its great if mkiortik develpers team give us a full squid feature with GUI for configuration
squid + mikrotik = linux kernal

+1

I am not sure why Mikrotik need to reinvest the wheel on this one with their own Proxy.
Squid is a perfect solution.

me too dude i dont knew why they do this great improvment even all mikrotik feature is great expact its proxy

ask normis foooor that

2.9 has squid

dear normis

it has but limited squid not full feature we need to use great feature of that great squid with great mikrotik all of us are Tired from use external squid box and patch with zph and and ...!!!! it s very cool if routerOS 4.x come with GUI squid feature

again i wish that

RouterOS is not a cache server. It has cache for convenience sake

I think router OS should be just a router (with wireless support) but allow "plugins"

So you can plugin squid/bind etc and have access to the full squid.conf file etc.

It should be stated that Mikrotik does not support plugins etc but you can use at your own risk.

Edit: was not my idea but another persons, I'm just bringing it up again

this is a good idea even we can pay for addtional feature like full squid

what did u say normis???

If you want a higher end/higher featured squid box, you have to put the work into it. If the linux part is too much trouble, try a different linux distribution or learn more linux stuff. I've got two linux boxes running squid that are much more reliable than a typical MT. Webmin can handle squid too, but I've never tried it.
Mikrotik has plenty to do besides reinvent squid so it works a different way for our convenience.

as far as i can remember decisions that where made - that if you need full featured proxy server then make one, that is why RouterOS have "Parent proxy" feature that will forward proxy requests to parent proxy, powerful and highly adjustable server with SCSI raid for cache etc. while RouterOS have small and easy to configure proxy server build in, for basic user needs. Thas was so because RouterOS is made for routing not for everything you need, we don't call it Mikrotik OS

name one feature that you want in RouterOS Proxy that is in Squid, but MT Proxy doesn't have.

Please no "full squid" because it's just not realistic. Let's make a questionnaire

Questionnaire its good idea

i needs MT proxy to cache some page that come with (no cache) directive and i want to specify the amount of time that the file should be valid for specified files and other ....
i can say additional full feature squid package for routerOs that can we buy it for additional cost just for x86 or AMD to accommodate the squid needs
Its gonna be great

name one feature that you want in RouterOS Proxy that is in Squid, but MT Proxy doesn't have.

No offense intended but an uptime of longer than 3 days under load (700+ customers) would be great

I vote for the same thing, the proxy needs to be more stable, specifically in relation to the hotspot system.

I personally run my own mini-proxy on my home connection using a 4gb usb drive with no problem, however I still see our larger sites (500+ user) fall over due to the proxy issues from time to time and the only guranteed fix I've found is to downgrade or upgrade the router, then revert back to the original version (which is v3.13)

there we go - everyone asks for Squid, but when I ask a simple question - no answers. Stability is no issue here, we had Squid before in v2.9 and it was practically the same. Can someone name a feature please?

I am not after any more proxy features.
I'd just like to be able to have a large stable ram cache on my router pointing to a larger upstream proxy.

I wonder whey squid was not stable in 2.9 as you say?

I find a Linux box with squid see's huge uptime under load.
I find Mikrotik proxy under load is not so great, I've written to support etc, they say they have not been able to test under that kind of load.

I didn't mean it like "just as unstable". I wonder why you have instability issues with current ROS proxy - have you worked with MT support on this?

I did speak to support but was unable to work with them, I could not afford to have my ISP stop every few days and need to drive done to reboot the system.

I had the same problem others mentioned here.

I never have used the 2.9 proxy so I can't compare the two.

It's very hard to fix something that we have never seen, and that you refuse to show us

Can you understand why I can't afford to show you?

Yes. But if everyone has these same reasons, we can't do anything

I agree, it would be frustrating for you.
If MT wanted I could enable and create the output file every hour, perhaps this would give clues.

normis: I've also sent through a number of supout.rif's and also participated and provided information to a number of other users who were also affected.

See - http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php ... t&start=50

How to replicate the problem yourself: Turn on transparent proxy and get 100 or more users to start using. Thats probably the easiest way to force it to crash. Alternatively you can put 500 users on a proxy without the transparent proxy turned on, then wait for 2-6 weeks for it to randomly crash (murphy's law means it's normally around 12 at night ).

i can vouch for the problem describe by "omega-00". very frustrating problem, given the fact that downgrading/upgrading and reverting back "Sometimes" "Fix" the problem, for a while, untill it occurs again....

feature suggestion that was available on previous versions, and removed on 3.x

Max object size:

Other suggestions: Use memory to stores metadata from the objects on cache, to speedup the access on disk.
Squid box for 150gb cache, is recommended at least 2g ram.
On my MT cache box, I´m almost 200gb full cache, but the memory used on router is very low.

I can imagine that seeking hard disk (sata) in this case takes a lot more of just querying the metadata and previously know where the object is.


best regards,
vince de luca

I have to say: When just used as a caching proxy server for a small number of users the proxy does work fine for me.

I currently have a 4gb proxy running of a usb drive on my mikrotik, currently using v3.16 with no problems, however if I try the same thing with any of my hotspot sites with lots of users (200+) and the transparent proxy turned on I see issues normally within 24 hours.

With the transparent proxy turned off I have systems running for up to 2 months maximum without seeing any issues.

On sites just using other router functionality I have uptimes of 4 months and more on v3.X with no issues

Since it is/was real Squid, why not to support proxy-mesh and so many other features that squid does ?

Why configuration options are so poor ?

At last give the opportunity to upload squid.conf inside mikrotik

Thats because RouterOS is RouterOS, not ProxyOS or SquidOS!

Thats because RouterOS is RouterOS, not ProxyOS or SquidOS!

I agree but, using that logic, it shouldn't have proxy at all.

My notice has to do with poor options in general. Do you want another example ?
-> Why TCP/UDP option is missing from OpenVPN ? It is just a line in the configuration file...

I have to say: When just used as a caching proxy server for a small number of users the proxy does work fine for me.

I currently have a 4gb proxy running of a usb drive on my mikrotik, currently using v3.16 with no problems, however if I try the same thing with any of my hotspot sites with lots of users (200+) and the transparent proxy turned on I see issues normally within 24 hours.

With the transparent proxy turned off I have systems running for up to 2 months maximum without seeing any issues.

On sites just using other router functionality I have uptimes of 4 months and more on v3.X with no issues

specifically for this case, did you send a supout.rif file to support? in any case, please make a new ticket and send some files. we will see what we can do

Hello Normis,

Just sent through another supout.rif regarding the proxy issue (which is now affecting v3.18)
Ticket number is 2009011466000074

Regards
Omega-00

Hello Normis,

Just sent through another supout.rif regarding the proxy issue (which is now affecting v3.18)
Ticket number is 2009011466000074

Has this problem been resolved yet or are you still experiencing these problems with v3.20?

When you guys have problems with the proxy, is it enough to disable/enable the cache to have it start working again or is a complete reboot neccesary?

I'm just wondering because I'm just about to put an RB1000 in production in a rather big corporate network to be the default gw and also use it as a forwarding proxy and I really really don't wanna have to reboot this device just because the proxy has a problem. Then I should get them 2 boxes right now and run the proxy forwarder in a seperate now that can be rebooted without affecting the normal routing out of the network.

Have yet to see any instances of that bug in 3.20 which I'm currently running at a site with 1300~ users spread over 2 devices.

Looks like its all good for that version.