RE: [squid-users] hardware dimension for caching over 100 persons

 
> Hallo there,
>
> first: happy new year!!!!

 The same to you.

>
> i've heard about using squid as an transparent proxy.

  Heard about squid = good.
  Heard about transp. proxying = bad.

> There
> is an w-lan
> network for over 100 people. I'll use Squid for just proxing
> http traffic
> without letting the people know that they are cached.

  Transp. proxying has it's drawbacks. Don't use it.
  Some disadvantages :

   - Intercepting HTTP breaks TCP/IP standards because user agents
think they are talking directly to the origin server.
   - As a result for instance on older IE versions ; "reload" did not
work as expected.
   - You can't use proxy authentication
   - You can't use IDENT lookups
   - Intercepting proxies are incompatible with IP filtering designed
to prevent address spoofing.
   - Clients are still expected to have full Internet DNS resolving
capabilities , when in certain Intranet/Firewalling setups , this
is not always wanted.
   - Related to above : because of transp. proxy setup : squid can sometimes
be forced to accept connections to existing sites , with DNS entries
but a webserver which is down. This can further confuse client browsers.

> I know about the
> configuration, but i don't know the dimensions. Any
> suggestion about cache
> size, memory usage and size and processor frequency?
>
> I'll think about a 400 MHz, 256 MB and 20 GB auf HD space, is
> this enough?
>
 
 The cache requirements mainly depend on use habbits and Internet access profile.
 Generale rule of thumb : the cache size should be about one
 week of traffic generated by your community.

 M.
Received on Sun Jan 02 2005 - 09:26:14 MST