Community discussions

MikroTik App
 
PHVermeulen
just joined
Topic Author
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:02 pm
Location: Witbank

Web Proxy Best Practise

Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:50 pm

We are looking at implementing mikrotik at our clients as web proxy server. This will be for caching, website blocking via white or black list setup and port blocking.

The problem we have is deciding on what routerboards to use if any or if going with a pc based solution would be better. So my questing is, is there anyone out there who has found hardware thats compatible with the OS or would it be easier getting a routerboard with enough processing power and adding an external hard disc drive to it and if so does that solution work.

So basically what is best practice when implementing mikrotik as a web proxy.

Thanks,
Regards for Sunny SA!!!!
 
User avatar
OwenITGuy
just joined
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 6:04 am
Location: Iowa, USA & Bunia, DRCongo
Contact:

Re: Web Proxy Best Practise

Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:27 pm

I can't fully answer your question with a "this option is best" kind of answer, but I will put in my two cents for your consideration. I found that MikroTik's built-in Web proxy was a bit limited. I instead setup a VM on one of our servers running the full version of the Squid proxy server, and installed Diladele Web Safety (formerly known as QuintoLabs Content Security) content filtering software. I then configured the MikroTik router's proxy to look to this proxy as its parent. This gives me finer-grained control over content filtering, and the storage/processing happens on another box.

If you want to do a purely MikroTik solution, then I'd suggest installing it on a small form factor computer rather than adding USB storage to a RouterBoard. I find RB USB storage to be a bit of a pain, and find the USB port more suitable for things like 3G modems. Just my opinions though.
 
reinerotto
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:35 am

Re: Web Proxy Best Practise

Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:31 pm

Using MT or squid will also depend upon
- number of clients: squid can be easily configured for high loads/many users
- user preferences: In case of mostly caching html etc. MT might be good enough. In case of caching large files (videos) squid is much more capable to do that

Expecting inceasing number of clients, squid should be better choice.
 
djdrastic
Member
Member
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 2:14 pm

Re: Web Proxy Best Practise

Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:10 pm

Proxy in ROS is just way too limited . You're much better off running something like a HP Microserver with Centos+squid or pfSense if you want something slightly more friendly.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Snooops, yhfung and 24 guests