On Sunday, October 16, 2016, Aron Xu <happyaron...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sunday, October 16, 2016, Paul Wise <p...@debian.org > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','p...@debian.org');>> wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 3:25 AM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: >> >> > Doing this for the per-country mirrors means that repointing mirrors >> > becomes a lot harder than it currently is, and this is something we do >> > on a daily basis. We'd need a solution for deploying the TLS cert for, >> > say, ftp.de.d.o to ftp.se.d.o (or ftp.d.o) if ftp.d.o is down for >> > maintenance. >> >> I never really liked the per-country mirrors being under debian.org, >> redirectors would be a better option. I think we really need to >> redesign the apt archive namespace for Debian. >> >> >> > Yeah but at the risk of making it broken like pypi and npm to quite > some people including me. > > To make it clear, content delivery systems used by pypi and npm don't work for many people in China because:
1) Major global CDN providers don't have decent services in the country (except akamai and cloudflare but need special contract); 2) BGP based network topology discovery never work because eBGP routing is not widely deployed for subscriber network; There's more to mention for Debian: 3) cdn.debian.net / httpredir.d.o tend to exclude local mirrors because of the synchronization delays are much higher than in EU/US, even current ftpX.cn.d.o would easily exceed the tolerance of redirecting software. Best Aron
