On Aug 14, 2012, at 12:09 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: > 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.
The following are current in ooo-site/trunk/content/projects/. update: ProductUpdateService aoo341 update30: ProductUpdateService update34: ProductUpdateService update35: ProductUpdateService update36: ProductUpdateService update38: ProductUpdateService (1) Are update/ProductUpdateSerice and update30/ProductUpdateService ready? (2) Currently all 404s on openoffice.org go here: ErrorDocument 404 /docs/custom_404.html Is that acceptable? Or must we use a real 404 response? Regards, Dave > > Best regards, Oliver. > >
