It's a long time since I logged in here.

Squid can forward traffic to different upstream proxies, depending on
the destination URL. This can be useful when, like us, you have
connections to several large extranets that use overlapping address
spaces. We can put a proxy on each extranet, and have it use the DNS
on that extranet, then use squid to router traffic to each of thes
proxies.

Also it can log in Apache format, which gives everything you need in a
concise readable format, and is easy to parse with scripts. The native
Sidewinder http proxy is worse than useless when it comes to logging -
it just swamps your audit.raw with non-information.

Squid also gives you some control over caching.

--- In sidewinder-users@yahoogroups.com, L Cubed <lllcubed@...> wrote:
>
> JR,
>
> One issue with SCC using squid, for whatever reason, they didn't keep
> current. I'm not sure of all the reasons why they decided to drop
it, but I
> would rather they did that if they are not going to keep in
lock-step with
> the application's direction.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm a squid fan, been using is for more than a few
> years, without Sidewinder.
>
> I would be interested in what features you are looking for in your
> HTTP/FTP/SOAP/AJAX proxy.
>
> Feel free to share,
>
> lllcubed
>
> On 9/27/05, jrdld2 <jrdld2@...> wrote:
> >
> > A month or two back I heard that SC were planning to drop squid. For
> > myself, I'd rather they wouldn't. The HTTP proxy logging is very poor
> > by comparison, and traffic seems to be slower. Squid also has some
> > functionality which is useful in our own particular setting.
> >
> > Are there any others out there who would like to see squid stay?
> > Maybe we could have a poll on this?
> >
> > JR
> >
>