I have 2 questions.
I hope mikrotik improve the web proxy, so it gives me reason not to use external proxy anymore. x86 RouterOS will be adequate.
Squids alot more flexable than anything MT could shoehorn in. I deployed on into a network that uses TPROXY to spoof the IP’s along with proxy header removal and is truely transparent. Combind this with video caching for youtube etc and that site’s seen a huge savings in bandwitch
The MT proxy has very limited use, I’d stick with squid!
question no. 2 then, why don’t mikrotik make it flexible just like squid? they are doing mikrotik on linux environment, and so is the external proxy. btw, what makes TPROXY and Transparent proxy different?
Transparent proxy is only transparent to the web browser, If you did a packet capture between the proxy and the internet uplink you would see the proxies IP address as the source, A major PITA when your trying to limit clients for a WISP or do traffic accounting upstream. TPROXY spoof’s the IP address information, It requires the box to be inline on the main uplink feed.
Squid is a very hungry beast and its setup is very different between installs. One system I ran used TPROXY in a ethernet bridge which required some IP’s to be dropped out of the TPROXY module and flow across the bridge like normal (OpenDNS Filtering breaks with any kind WISP proxy)
Some things just arent simple and shouldnt be included in ROS, its a router not a OS 
MT’s time should be spent elsewhere
Can you share the microtik configuration related to squid and explain how the setup was done? we have setup tproxy and it works fine without using microtik.
Thanks
guys the web proxy on mikrotik does wonders to does save me about 15% on bandwidth as it does cache too. depending on the traffic mikrotik should be able to work well. it will cache windows updates, and other common updates like ant viruses