Re: Making squid answer both transparent and non-transparent?

From: Cefiar <>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 20:58:15 +1100

At 07:55 19/01/98 +0200, Amos Shapira wrote:

Hello there Amos..

>Now I want to try to setup transparent proxy, but without having to
>update my users about this - i.e. I want users who already set their
>browsers to port 8080 to leave their browsers alone but start
>forwarding users who didn't do so to port 80 of my Squid server
>(that's because the Cisco router can't rewrite the destination TCP
>port, can it?).
>The FAQ says that it assumes that Squid already listens on port 80, is
>it possible to leave squid to listen on port 8080 for proxy requests
>and add port 80 for non-proxy ("accel_mode"?) requests?
>Another option I was thinking about is to setup squid to listen on
>port 80 as the FAQ says and have some simple application on port 8080
>which will pass port 8080 to port 80. Would that work? Would it hurt
>performance significantly?

Options as I see them..

1> Check out the multi-port listen code that is (somewhere) on that was written by an Australian who works/worked
for Access One, a large provider here in Australia. I don't believe it's
for the latest version of squid of course, but it shouldn't be too hard to
adapt, should it?

2> Redirect port 80 locally to port 8080 locally. Easy to achieve under
linux with standard firewall-type tools like ipfwadm.

3> Write a program to redirect port 80 to port 8080. Not as elegant as #2
and most likely no where near as fast, and higher load.

#1 is most likely the best option, tho #2 is easy to setup and requires no
patching (and subsequent waiting for an update version to work with the
next version of squid, or hacking about with code, or even plain forgetting
to install the patch) to the squid source.

-=[ Stuart Young (Aka Cefiar) ]=--------------------------------------
| | |
| Hmm? What? Earth technology? Oh just thump it, that usually works. |
Received on Mon Jan 19 1998 - 01:49:18 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:38:27 MST