Re: Service names for Debian mirrors in cloud infrastructure
On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 21:59:33 +0100 (CET)
Jan Niggemann <email@example.com> wrote:
> As someone who hasn't substantially contributed to Debian, I'd
> like to provide an "outside" view on the service naming issue.
> If I see that something is under debian.org, then I believe it's
> - official,
> - well maintained and
> - not restricted geographically or otherwise.
> This IMHO reflects what most Debian users would expect of
> If a service is restricted, it shouldn't be under debian.org.
I run a Debian mirror, under mirrors.$provider_domain as many others do.
I see stuff under debian.org as being a recommendation from the Debian
project - e.g. I'd expect ftp.uk.debian.org to resolve to one or more
mirrors in the UK that the Debian project has decided provide decent,
stable mirroring - as a "I don't really care whose mirror I use, as
long as it's in the UK and performs reasonably". I would not expect to
see anything that isn't publicly reachable there.
I see no value in a $vendor.vendors.debian.org hostname, rather than
just mirrors.$hoster or debian.mirrors.$hoster or whatever they want to
use, even for publicly-accessible ones, even less so for restricted
So, another vote that stuff under debian.org should be reserved for
convenience round-robin country-based round-robin entries for
public mirrors, and that there's no need to have entries for each
individual host's mirrors under there.
I'd say that debian.mirrors.azure.net or similar is perfectly reasonable
and sane, and established practice already at many places.