On Nov 6, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Teske, Devin wrote: > > On Nov 6, 2013, at 3:44 PM, Glen Barber wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 11:37:43PM +0000, Teske, Devin wrote: >>>> You do not need to show any servers except pkg.FreeBSD.org. >>> >>> Bapt *just* got finished telling me in IRC that we should also list: >>> >>> pkg.eu >>> pkg.us-* >>> >> >> Why? >> >>> Which I assume to be the same make/model of pkg.f.o (does not >>> return an A or AAAA but only SVR). >>> >> >> And if we need to change something with the infrastructure, we now have >> to tell people that this was done. You are putting hard-coded >> limitations on us. Don't. >> > > I disagree. > > You're making the argument for "what if a CDN goes away". > > Well... people stop using that entry because it's broken and in the next > release > you remove it. > > What sounds like a maintenance issue will actually save you support events. > And for whatever hours that this proposed maintenance actually cost you, > you'll > more than make up that in prevented support events. > > I'm talking about saving time (because we're all volunteers, right?) > > Let me be very explicit... > > > >> With a single entry (pkg.FreeBSD.org), we do not have to worry about >> what is broken if (when) we need to change something. >> > > Let's say that the one entry doesn't do what you want (which requires trusting > the CDN maintenance on the back-end)... > > You're telling me that it's more efficient to immediately defer every single > user > to the support forums the moment there's a single hiccup in the ONE and ONLY > CDN name that we're providing? > > Ok... but let's look at one alternative... > > If we listed more than one CDN, and one breaks... the wise and tenacious user > simply ... tries another? > > But if there are no other choices... then you'll be headed strait to the > forums or > mailing lists and generating what I call a "support event". > > I'm sorry, but I don't agree that listing only one single entry is going to > be beneficial > to the end-user; only to the person that thinks having a single CDN to > maintain is > going to actually save them work (which may only be true if they are not the > ones > that have to manage support events).
I think there's a lot of misunderstanding going on because of the way that clusteradm has set up our CDN. It is true that right now, pkg.f.o returns SRV records for all known mirrors. It is also true that previously mentioned pkg.eu.f.o returns the one and only SRV record for the one mirror in Europe. However, I am planning for a day when our CDN is administered in a more traditional fashion. That is... I envisage pkg.f.o not returning all known mirrors (because there will be too many as the CDN grows), but instead pkg.f.o would return only the 3 closest mirrors. Meanwhile, pkg.eu.f.o would grow to return records for the top-3 closest servers in Europe. Just because the amount of machines that we have available for our CDN is small, doesn't mean that it will be small forever. Eventually (as is the plan), the list of servers should far exceed the number of SRV records you will want to return. And when we get to that point, I highly recommend that we allow the user to choose the CDN specific to their country (at the very least). -- Devin _____________ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail