[squid-users] Reverse Proxy - cache_peer vs. direct

From: Paolo Biancolli <Paolo.Biancolli@dont-contact.us>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 16:34:08 +0200

Hi,

I have squid 2.6 stable4 in acceleration mode and have managed to get
acceleration working with both cache_peer and always_direct. Are both
methods equally secure or is one preferable to the other?

I have several web/ftp servers on my internal network that are directly
accessed from the internet (which cannot be moved into a DMZ) and
therefore want to place the squid reverse proxy in this DMZ. I am
concerned that using always_direct will defeat the point but also have
web servers operating on multiple ports (and am having issues
configuring cache_peer for 1 parent "cache" on multiple ports).

Any advice is greatly appreciated

Regards
Paolo Biancolli

<html><body><font face = "verdana" size = "0.8" color = "navy">This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorized signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary.</font></body></html>
Received on Fri Nov 10 2006 - 07:34:19 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Fri Dec 01 2006 - 12:00:03 MST