Re: status of Debian mirror natasha.stmarytx.edu ?
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 02:03:24PM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 06:48:32PM -0600, John Currey wrote:
> > Natasha (the 5th) lives again. New hardware and 1.4 TB of disk space.
> >
> > http://natasha.stmarytx.edu/debian
> > ftp://natasha.stmarytx.edu/debian
> > rsync://natasha.stmarytx.edu/debian
>
> Which server do you mirror from ?
> mirrors.kernel.org ?
>
> I need this info to add your mirror in the list.
Yes, it was "mirrors.kernel.org" .
I am embarrised... I didn't notice the DNS rotation on
mirrors.kernel.org.
So while its "mirrors.kernel.org" was in the rsync script,
it was zeus1.kernel.org or zeus2.kernel.org in project.
I changed that to 204.152.191.39 (zeus2.kernel.org according to
project/trace).
I don't like doing it by the IP but I can not use the zeus2.kernel.org
DNS name which resolves to a host IP that cannot be rsync'd, regardless
of it being the same machine or not.
>
> > rsync currently running but no DVD and CD images are available yet.
> > will be /debian-cd in N months.
> [..]
>
> > The campus should have 100mbps bandwidth by spring break (current is
> > only 50), and a has a per connection bandwidth limits.
> >
> > Q. Is this too small a pipe for a full mirror?
> > We locally use a few of the archs: i386, amd64, hppa, arm, hurd. sparc
> > in order of usage. I could drop some to reduce the rsync time
> > and improve the bandwidth ratio (Bw amount used to sync versus that
> > downloaded).
>
> That's up to you, we don't know your internal usage statistics.
>
> for the general statistics, see http://popcon.debian.org
>
> If you consider that several users per architecture use your mirror
> daily, it's worth.
>
I'd rather make the whole available (for political reasons).
> > Q. Is the mod_cband a bad idea for a debian mirror
> > from either a political point of view or a technical one?
>
> See the reply of Josip Rodin.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Simon Paillard
>
mod_cband dropped for now.
Thank you very much for your responses.
J.Currey
Reply to: