Hi, Am 14.08.2012 um 20:52 schrieb Dave Fisher <[email protected]>:
> > 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. I would like to see a 404 for all currently unused updateX*.services URLs. The former OOo versions which would get in contact with these URLs should handle such replies. Best regards, Oliver.
