On Aug 14, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:13 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >> >>> On 03/08/2012 Rob Weir wrote: >>>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann >>>> wrote: >>>>> I am planning to give a talk on ApacheCon EU about >>>>> the update function in AOO and the Update Service. In this talk I will >>>>> give >>>>> a deep insight in its purpose and functionality which should be enough >>>>> input >>>>> for a corresponding volunteer to create a "real" web service for our >>>>> Update >>>>> Service. ... >>>> The question is: how dynamic does it need to be? It is not like the >>>> upgrade options change minute by minute. These change slowly, at the >>>> pace of our release cycle, so every few months. >>> >>> Yes, and traffic is a key factor here. With potentially hundreds of >>> millions of clients hitting the servers, the biggest problem is not >>> re-implementing the update service as a web service, but serving it >>> efficiently. And indeed I agree that staticizing the results somehow would >>> be good to do, since we have a relatively low number of possible answers >>> with respect to the number of requests. >> >> Oliver requested removal of update32 from DNS on INFRA-5112 and now Infra is >> requesting PPMC agreement. >> >> Is now a time to discuss cleaning up all of the staroffice urls here: >> >> update.services CNAME sd-web4.staroffice.de. >> update23.services CNAME sd-web2.staroffice.de. >> update24.services CNAME sd-web2.staroffice.de. >> update30.services CNAME sd-web2.staroffice.de. >> update31.services CNAME sd-web2.staroffice.de. >> update32.services CNAME www.openoffice.org. >> update33.services CNAME sd-web2.staroffice.de. >> update34.services CNAME www.openoffice.org. >> update35.services CNAME www.openoffice.org. >> update36.services CNAME www.openoffice.org. >> update38.services CNAME www.openoffice.org. >> >> update32 is the proposed change in the JIRA issue. >> >> update33 is the added removal. >> >> What about update, update23, update24, update30, update31? >> >> Should we do anything now as well? >> > > I suppose returning errors from *.openoffice.org is no worse than > returning errors from *.staroffice.de. And if we do that we can > handle these URL's more gracefully in the future if we want to.
It might be nicer to return a 404 rather than timing out on a non-responsive ip address. Oliver or Kay will need to confirm what will happen. Regards, Dave > > >> Regards, >> Dave >>
