From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 19 07:50:33 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8E4516A402 for ; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:50:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ob@gruft.de) Received: from obh.snafu.de (obh.snafu.de [213.73.92.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F6A443D49 for ; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:50:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ob@gruft.de) Received: from ob by obh.snafu.de with local (Exim 4.61 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1FW7SJ-000Faa-Ue for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:50:31 +0200 Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:50:31 +0200 From: Oliver Brandmueller To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060419075031.GW46464@e-Gitt.NET> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <3aaaa3a0604171743y33af6355udf750eca65605920@mail.gmail.com> <44456BC2.1050102@freebsd.org> <3aaaa3a0604181728p79df162bk900d488c746d8069@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GTZ+2qEBTXdGs1w1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3aaaa3a0604181728p79df162bk900d488c746d8069@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: Oliver Brandmueller Subject: Re: portsnap mirror servers X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:50:34 -0000 --GTZ+2qEBTXdGs1w1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 01:28:56AM +0100, Chris wrote: > On 18/04/06, Colin Percival wrote: > > Why do you think there should be an .eu mirror? >=20 > Whilst portsnap is fast, it is a noticeable speed difference when > using from eu servers, I also think its a good idea for redundancy. I did not yet check in the sources or with tcpdump, but from the=20 htrougput I see, I'd guess, there's a lot of sequential two-way=20 communication involved. That kind of traffic is massively influenced by=20 latency. While most sites in europe are reachable for me with a latency=20 of 15-30ms, I have between 120 and 200 ms to most sites across the=20 atlantic. Maybe this is old-school and not valid today anymore as it was 10 years=20 ago, but keeping traffic local and not pushing the same data through the=20 big exchanges and long distance lines again and again stil seems=20 reasonable to me for various reasons. I also vote for more geographic distribution and a local mirror in=20 europe. While not having any usage data (current usage, hstroy,=20 perspectives), I cannot decide of course, if the time has already come,=20 but I think time will come in foreseeable future. - Oliver --=20 | Oliver Brandmueller | Offenbacher Str. 1 | Germany D-14197 Berlin | | Fon +49-172-3130856 | Fax +49-172-3145027 | WWW: http://the.addict.de/ | | Ich bin das Internet. Sowahr ich Gott helfe. | | Eine gewerbliche Nutzung aller enthaltenen Adressen ist nicht gestattet! | --GTZ+2qEBTXdGs1w1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFERevHiqtMdzjafykRAlEJAJ4rpr0UgBGyupl0LcucmIRLyI2I4wCeNfwD SQZQgBcPcbPEdu+s/jLralI= =EnGD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GTZ+2qEBTXdGs1w1--