Welcome to ISAserver.org

Upstream cache to ISP proxy

Users viewing this topic: none

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [ISA Server 2004 Cache] >> General >> Upstream cache to ISP proxy

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Upstream cache to ISP proxy - 25.Oct.2004 3:14:00 PM

plambrecht

Posts: 3
Joined: 6.Jul.2004
Status: offline

Hi,

I want to use my ISA as a proxy server for the internal network.
The ISA should forward (w/ or w/o cache) all there request to a proxy server of my ISP (non ISA)

How can I do this ?
I tried 'Redirecting to a specified upstream server', but it doesn't seem to do the trick...

Any tips ?

Pieter

Post #: 1

Featured Links*

RE: Upstream cache to ISP proxy - 26.Oct.2004 1:24:00 PM

tshinder

Posts: 47659
Joined: 10.Jan.2001
From: Texas
Status: offline

Hi Pieter,

What errors are you receiving?

What cache protocols does the upstream Web Proxy support?

Thanks!
Tom

(in reply to plambrecht)

Post #: 2

RE: Upstream cache to ISP proxy - 15.Nov.2004 3:34:00 PM

sstrickson

Posts: 1
Joined: 15.Nov.2004
From: UK
Status: offline

Hi

This is my first time of using this and i would just like somone to confirm what i think, or to tell me i am way off the mark.

I am using a single nic ISA Server 2004, set up only for web caching. This ISA server, is linked to an upstream Proxy server as it is being used for test purposes only, ready for an upgrade. An account has been used to authenticate to this upstream proxy. My problem is that when i enfoce authenication in integrated mode, the client always recieves as request for login name, password and domain.

I believe this will happen as it is going to an upstream proxy, but would i be right in saying if i replaced our current proxy with this ISA server (removing the upstream proxy portion), authentication would be transparent to the user just as it is now?

This scenario will allow access without forcing authentication, but annomymous connections is not something i want to see.

I hope someone can help.

Steve

(in reply to plambrecht)

Post #: 3