Re: transparent proxies

From: Leigh Porter <>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 15:01:25 +0100

Richard Ayres wrote:

I'm using such a setup. The only issues so far have been that:

> (a) it's fairly useless to use my service providers parent caches
> (cache-? because by proxying squid only sees IP
> addresses,
> not host names and demon aren't generally asked for IP addresses by
> other users;

So a proxying cache cannot be used as a "normal" cache as well? Could
you run anothercopy of squid on the machine and do some jiggerypokery to
do that?

> (b) kernel 2.0.30 is a no-no as transparent proxying is broken (I use
> 2.0.29);

I have just set it up on 2.0.30 and it seems to work ok! Are you saying
it'sgoing to crash soon ;-)

> (c) client browsers must do host name lookups themselves, as they
> don't know
> they're using a proxy;

Isn't this good? It means you catch all the users, even if they have not
setup theirbrowsers to use a proxy..

Funny, There is a company selling this for about 2000 UKP a month!

Received on Mon Jul 28 1997 - 06:58:52 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:35:51 MST