Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:32:10 +0200 From: Dimitar Vasilev <dimitar.vassilev@gmail.com> To: Xin LI <delphij@gmail.com> Cc: hubs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: new porstnap mirror Message-ID: <59adc1a0912110732v515346eeq4ce82830f5b75618@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <a78074950912110216y240d0d1br36d2b3a4e1e69768@mail.gmail.com> References: <59adc1a0912110158j156706d7m1fa7b25002f61edb@mail.gmail.com> <a78074950912110216y240d0d1br36d2b3a4e1e69768@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > portsnap mirrors would consume some thousands of times of bandwidth > that a normal client would typically use. Therefore, you may need to > prove the usefulness (i.e. Internet access is very slow in your > country and having a local portsnap mirror would significantly improve > the users' experience, etc, and you really have so many users). > > For small to medium sized enterprise/countries, a possible alternative > would be to do this with reverse HTTP proxy which caches these files. > > Cheers, > -- > Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> http://www.delphij.net > I'm located in Bulgaria and to be honest one user asked. So far my regular patients are a news agency, 2-3 private hospitals, some Turkish government servers, 2-3 telcos and the regular FBSD bunch - 100-200 local people plus the various stray bunch from around the world. We will see how it goes. Best regards, Dimitar Vassilev
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?59adc1a0912110732v515346eeq4ce82830f5b75618>