Hi, Sorry for the late reply.
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 06:33:14PM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote: > I don't think it is good idea. Because synxproxy to Japan trans > pacific network connection bandwidth is narrow (~ 5Mbps). A little test shows ~5MBytes/s i.e. 40Mbps (as of now). > If you want to setup some kind of redundancy of push primary in Japan, > we should build some kind of pushproxy and management system of > primary pusy mirror backend. Could you please check what you want to do on your side, before we configure the push ? For push setup, we need: - you to record your mirror at http://www.debian.org/mirror/submit - a hostname/user/port for the SSH trigger Then we'll provide you a rsync access (though you may use the same as hanzubon). Best regards. > >>>>> Hideki Yamane <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Some of you may know, I've started debian-mirror.sakura.ne.jp. > >> > >> http://henrich-on-debian.blogspot.com/2013/02/introducing-debian-mirrorsakuranejp.html > >> > >> Now it is pushed-mirror under hanzubon.jp, and I think it's better to be > >> pushed > >> from upstream syncproxy if we can. > >> > >> The reason is, sakura mirror and other mirrors pushed from hanzubon.jp is > >> providing > >> ftp.jp.debian.org. ftp.jp.d.o has some robustness mechanism that if > >> primary one goes > >> down or not sync some days and be obsolete, then DNS entry will switch to > >> point > >> another mirror. However, if hanzubon.jp archive will stop or be > >> corrupted, then > >> **all** of those mirrors are same state. If sakura mirror can get updated > >> archives > >> from syncproxy, ftp.jp.d.o get more robustness IMO. > >> > >> Could you consider to add sakura mirror as syncproxy leaf, please? -- Simon Paillard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
