Re: Less dinstall FTW?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Less dinstall FTW?
- From: Tollef Fog Heen <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 11:22:24 +0200
- Message-id: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mail-followup-to: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <20130830161909.GA15312@roeckx.be> (Kurt Roeckx's message of "Fri, 30 Aug 2013 18:19:09 +0200")
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20130829160809.GB12134@kitenet.net> <20130829161050.GA28566@helios.localdomain> <20130829163326.GD12134@kitenet.net> <20130829163856.GA6234@helios.localdomain> <email@example.com> <20130830161909.GA15312@roeckx.be>
]] Kurt Roeckx
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 09:13:59AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > >
> > > I could see a *huge* load on this pool for this reason.
> > If so, so what? We are not short of bandwidth and we do have contacts
> > and offers from CDNs which will make serving this Not A Problem(TM).
> So should we take that as an official statement from DSA, and
> just do it?
Yes, you can take it as an official statement from DSA. Whether we
should do it or not does not, AIUI, only depend on bandwidth, so not
commenting on that bit.
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are