Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:00:50 +0100 From: Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net> To: Jason Helfman <jhelfman@e-e.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem (again) with portsnap5.FreeBSD.org? Message-ID: <20101119090050.GA37868@megatron.madpilot.net> In-Reply-To: <20101109210322.GD11785@eggman.experts-exchange.com> References: <19264903.2523091287604404630.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> <20101020200247.GA60489@icarus.home.lan> <20101021083124.GA50114@megatron.madpilot.net> <20101021115121.282ecadb@gumby.homeunix.com> <AANLkTinBbf8XkR445uj3Ku7vZB8ZHQOQypqL_zngjf7d@mail.gmail.com> <4CC082DF.2080203@madpilot.net> <20101109210322.GD11785@eggman.experts-exchange.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:03:22PM -0800, Jason Helfman wrote: > >> > >>Yep - update5 is currently weighted 50% in the SRV: > >> > >>$ host -t srv _http._tcp.update.freebsd.org > >>_http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 35 80 update4.FreeBSD.org. > >>_http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 50 80 update5.FreeBSD.org. > >>_http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 5 80 update3.FreeBSD.org. > >>_http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 10 80 update2.FreeBSD.org. > >> > > > >Thank you. This explains what I was seeing and makes it in fact quite > >normal. > > I am seeing similiar issues with portsnap5. > Are you pointing portsnap to update? > > host -t srv _http._tcp.portsnap.freebsd.org > _http._tcp.portsnap.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 10 80 portsnap6.FreeBSD.org. > _http._tcp.portsnap.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 20 80 portsnap5.FreeBSD.org. > _http._tcp.portsnap.freebsd.org has SRV record 2 10 80 portsnap4.FreeBSD.org. > _http._tcp.portsnap.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 10 80 portsnap1.FreeBSD.org. > _http._tcp.portsnap.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 10 80 portsnap2.FreeBSD.org. I'm getting the same DNS result you're getting. portsnap5 has less weight now and is in fact being used less. My systems are more frequently using other servers now. A few days ago portsnap5 did not respond, anyway in that case portsnap simply timed out and tried another server shortly after. -- Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101119090050.GA37868>