• This is a poll to see the interest in the Squid package that I've been working on.  I'm curious to know the impact to the userbase of pfSense.


  • I think, based on the questions about the squid package on the mail lists, you can safely assume that this will be a popular package.  Unfortunately, because squid has so many various uses, adding onto your basic package is going to become a very involved task.  It'll be kind of hard to come up with a one-size-fits-all package.


  • I am happy with just the basics to start with.  Seems to be going ok for me for now.


  • @submicron:

    I think, based on the questions about the squid package on the mail lists, you can safely assume that this will be a popular package.  Unfortunately, because squid has so many various uses, adding onto your basic package is going to become a very involved task.  It'll be kind of hard to come up with a one-size-fits-all package.

    I'm trying to keep a specific scope on the project as it expands and I probably won't be able to meet everyone's needs.  The primary development path I've been contemplating is:

    • Squid

    • squidGuard

    • Log Integration into Web GUI

    • HAVP/Squid

    The current Squid configuration allows for quite a bit of complexity, but the challenge will be determined based upon everyone's request and of course, my time.  :)  I actually find this a good outlet to be creative and enjoy it, but there are so many other demands on my time development has been slower than I'd like.  I'll get there…

    Mike


  • I'd like to be able to use the proxy portion of Squid on the wrap platform.

    (I'd actually be happy with jftpgw - as all i really need is a ftp proxy – but jftpgw doesn't support SSL/TLS.)


  • @swinokur:

    I'd like to be able to use the proxy portion of Squid on the wrap platform.

    (I'd actually be happy with jftpgw - as all i really need is a ftp proxy – but jftpgw doesn't support SSL/TLS.)

    I don't have access to a wrap platform to perform any testing on.  Can you identify any specific configuration differences that may be necessary?  Thanks!

    Best Regards,
    Mike


  • keep in mind: wrap runs from cf and has a read only file system. to many write will kill the media in quite short time if you set it to read write. also the wrap (only) has a 266 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM. I wouldn't recommend running a caching proxy application on a cf-media. Also note that the embedded builds have no packagesupport either.


  • hoba:

    • i was hoping to just use squid as a proxy – with no caching.
    • but it sounds like the lack of packagesupport is pretty much a 'deal killer'?

    Mike:
    as hoba says wrap is an embedded platform running from CF - (read only), and is only a 266mhz proc with 128M of memory.  It's a tiny hardware footprint.  Also, as hoba says no packagesupport.


  • The embedded builds still have package functionality, but it is not exposed to the webGUI. Although this could change in the future (particularly for packages that aren't write-heavy), those that want to run packages will need to use the 'standard' build on a hard drive or microdrive for the time being.


  • @colin_:

    The embedded builds still have package functionality, but it is not exposed to the webGUI. Although this could change in the future (particularly for packages that aren't write-heavy), those that want to run packages will need to use the 'standard' build on a hard drive or microdrive for the time being.

    Problem I have is the standard install differs from the wrap install right after installation. I'm running the wrap install because it doesn't auto-assign an interface to the lan ip-range and the box I'm running is a wrap but it has a 20gig hard drive in it.


  • @ZGamer:

    @colin_:

    The embedded builds still have package functionality, but it is not exposed to the webGUI. Although this could change in the future (particularly for packages that aren't write-heavy), those that want to run packages will need to use the 'standard' build on a hard drive or microdrive for the time being.

    Problem I have is the standard install differs from the wrap install right after installation. I'm running the wrap install because it doesn't auto-assign an interface to the lan ip-range and the box I'm running is a wrap but it has a 20gig hard drive in it.

    You can use the standard install to install to a wrap if you know what the ramifications are (drive always mounted RW).


  • Thanks Myntric
    just register for this post ^^

    using Squid as the proxy