You are missing my point: you are creating an extra step that is not needed. There are plenty of solutions to this problem that do not require this level of indirection.I like this system better because: 1. It is perfectly transparent to the users. They know exactly where they are downloading from and are given options for alternative locations.
For example, you could incorporate the CGI script logic into a shtml file that has a choice list representing each mirror (and method). The links on our download page would be recomputed as you select the mirror. I still prefer a round-robin DNS as that doesn't require any CGI scripting.
No, it's not. Currently, we have bogus mirrors. For example, I see apache.towardex.com listed as a mirror for me. When I click on the link, it gives me a 404. That is inacceptable.2. It is extremely simple to configure and maintain.
If you want to force users to do this scheme, then you have to ensure that we don't list broken mirrors.
No, I don't think we can deploy this because we have so many busted mirrors.3. It can be put into place NOW.
I'd rather we do the right solution, then do a broken solution. This is a broken solution that will result in too much confusion for our users. Please do not switch to this. -- justin
