the web proxy with mikrotik now is very simple its great if mkiortik develpers team give us a full squid feature with GUI for configuration
squid + mikrotik = linux kernal
+1
I am not sure why Mikrotik need to reinvest the wheel on this one with their own Proxy.
Squid is a perfect solution.
me too dude i dont knew why they do this great improvment even all mikrotik feature is great expact its proxy
ask normis foooor that
2.9 has squid
dear normis
it has but limited squid not full feature we need to use great feature of that great squid with great mikrotik all of us are Tired from use external squid box and patch with zph and and …!!! it s very cool if routerOS 4.x come with GUI squid feature
again i wish that
RouterOS is not a cache server. It has cache for convenience sake
I think router OS should be just a router (with wireless support) but allow “plugins”
So you can plugin squid/bind etc and have access to the full squid.conf file etc.
It should be stated that Mikrotik does not support plugins etc but you can use at your own risk.
Edit: was not my idea but another persons, I’m just bringing it up again
this is a good idea even we can pay for addtional feature like full squid
what did u say normis???
If you want a higher end/higher featured squid box, you have to put the work into it. If the linux part is too much trouble, try a different linux distribution or learn more linux stuff. I’ve got two linux boxes running squid that are much more reliable than a typical MT. Webmin can handle squid too, but I’ve never tried it.
jp@xj13:~> ssh saucer uptime
Password:
10:50am up 1005 days 18:01, 1 user, load average: 0.04, 0.07, 0.01
jp@xj13:~> ssh lbs uptime
Password:
10:50am up 1049 days 19:27, 0 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
jp@xj13:~>
Mikrotik has plenty to do besides reinvent squid so it works a different way for our convenience.
as far as i can remember decisions that where made - that if you need full featured proxy server then make one, that is why RouterOS have “Parent proxy” feature that will forward proxy requests to parent proxy, powerful and highly adjustable server with SCSI raid for cache etc. while RouterOS have small and easy to configure proxy server build in, for basic user needs. Thas was so because RouterOS is made for routing not for everything you need, we don’t call it Mikrotik OS
name one feature that you want in RouterOS Proxy that is in Squid, but MT Proxy doesn’t have.
Please no “full squid” because it’s just not realistic. Let’s make a questionnaire
Questionnaire its good idea
i needs MT proxy to cache some page that come with (no cache) directive and i want to specify the amount of time that the file should be valid for specified files and other …
i can say additional full feature squid package for routerOs that can we buy it for additional cost just for x86 or AMD to accommodate the squid needs
Its gonna be great
No offense intended but an uptime of longer than 3 days under load (700+ customers) would be great
I vote for the same thing, the proxy needs to be more stable, specifically in relation to the hotspot system.
I personally run my own mini-proxy on my home connection using a 4gb usb drive with no problem, however I still see our larger sites (500+ user) fall over due to the proxy issues from time to time and the only guranteed fix I’ve found is to downgrade or upgrade the router, then revert back to the original version (which is v3.13)
there we go - everyone asks for Squid, but when I ask a simple question - no answers. Stability is no issue here, we had Squid before in v2.9 and it was practically the same. Can someone name a feature please?
I am not after any more proxy features.
I’d just like to be able to have a large stable ram cache on my router pointing to a larger upstream proxy.
I wonder whey squid was not stable in 2.9 as you say?
I find a Linux box with squid see’s huge uptime under load.
I find Mikrotik proxy under load is not so great, I’ve written to support etc, they say they have not been able to test under that kind of load.
I didn’t mean it like “just as unstable”. I wonder why you have instability issues with current ROS proxy - have you worked with MT support on this?
I did speak to support but was unable to work with them, I could not afford to have my ISP stop every few days and need to drive done to reboot the system.
I had the same problem others mentioned here.
I never have used the 2.9 proxy so I can’t compare the two.
It’s very hard to fix something that we have never seen, and that you refuse to show us 
Can you understand why I can’t afford to show you?