From owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 30 13:47:43 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C19B37B401 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 13:47:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.32.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6436443F75 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 13:47:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (kensmith@localhost [127.0.0.1]) h6UKldbr005294 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:47:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kensmith@localhost) by electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h6UKldFc005293 for freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:47:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:47:39 -0400 From: Ken Smith To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20030730204739.GA4916@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> References: <20030729052619.GA16116@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <200307301819.h6UIJ8gw040301@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200307301819.h6UIJ8gw040301@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Re: Requirements Final Draft Attempt #2 :-/ X-BeenThere: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Distributions Hubs: mail sup ftp List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 20:47:43 -0000 On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:19:08PM -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > > 5) Will be given a "ftpX.CC.freebsd.org" hostname and will be a candidate > > for becoming a "ftpX.freebsd.org" hostname. > > > 3) Will be given a "ftpX.CC.freebsd.org" name. > > I think that this would be more helpful if sites were categorized > along a different axis: architecture. It doesn't make sense to > require every primary mirror site everywhere in the world to carry > every architecture. Few people outside of Japan, for example, have > need of PC98 releases. Other places may want to cut out Alpha or > sparc64 bits if those distributions are very infrequently downloaded. This all depends on what (if anything) we want to tell users the distinction is between TLD machines and the rest of them. Based mostly on some chats with someone on re@ I got the impression the most useful thing would be if we could tell end-users: You will find what you are looking for on the TLD machines, and they will have it very shortly after it gets posted to the Distribution Servers. You might get better performance from a CC-listed machine because it is "closer" to you but what those hosts carry and how fast they get it varies. It seems simple and clean. :-) I'm open to suggestions on what would be a better way to use the TLD designation, though I figured one of the things we were moving towards was TLD-based things are of "International" interest versus "Regional" interest. I don't mind doing more fine-grained cataloging and having that reflected in the Handbook but it's a two-way street. I'd need to provide more info in the Handbook and probably would need to update it more often but you guys would need to keep me informed whenever you make changes like dropping an architecture, or getting more disk space and deciding to carry more, etc. That said the freebsdmirrors.org maintainer got back to us this morning and seems interested in working with us to adjust the site to the newer status of things (DNS layout as well as architectures supported, etc). Just needs to find the time. That might be a solution as well. -- Ken Smith - From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu there, funny things are everywhere. | - Theodore Geisel |