www-mirrors mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Kenna" <andr...@stamina.com.au>
Subject RE: cvs commit: site/xdocs/dev mirrors.xml
Date Thu, 28 Nov 2002 01:43:58 GMT
AFAIK, there are some issues that are being discussed in another mailing
list regarding the Apache DNS... It's a great idea though


-----Original Message-----
From: Haesu [mailto:haesu@towardex.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 28 November 2002 12:46 PM
To: mirrors@apache.org
Cc: infrastructure@apache.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: site/xdocs/dev mirrors.xml

You guys should look at the way www.kernel.org does the mirrors.

They have a unified DNS convention for all mirror operators, and they
welcome any new mirrors whether or not it's 10 or 100 mirrors in total.

Each mirror is given ftp and www.<mirror's preferred
handle>.lkams.kernel.org hostname pointing to their IP address.

I think we can do the same. Once we do, may be we should utilize a
script or something that's scheduled. The script would query all mirrors
in the DNS listing and do a GET /dist , etc to see if the mirror is up
to date or not.. Each mirror should be marked with 'points' where if the
mirror is not up to date, the script would hold a threshold of how many
points the out-of-date mirror will hit before getting delisted, or
getting warned. If a mirror is down.. same deal..

Just my idea.. :)


On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, James R Grinter wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 09:17:29AM +1000, jason andrade wrote:
> > then they are no longer mirrors.  if people are providing binaries 
> > they should be submitting them to the official site where it then 
> > propagates out to all the other mirrors.
> I think this meant "installing their own apache from source rather 
> than vendor binaries", not building the binary packages!
> But if everything is PGP signed, then the integrity of the mirror and 
> what it serves is secondary (and merely annoying if it breaks). As 
> long as we encourage people to check them, of course.
> The idea of having an umbrealla DNS is ok (though it requires some 
> extra handling of VirtualHost issues at the mirrors).  It could be 
> incorporated into a method of automatically checking mirrors and 
> dropping them out of the rotation if they appear to go stale, until 
> they commence working again.
> James.

View raw message