Re: Live Media
2009/2/19 Sebastian Hilbert <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> On Montag 16 Februar 2009, Chris Lamb wrote:
>> Sebastian Hilbert wrote:
>> > I have a dedicated server that could server for development purposes.
>> That's very kind of you, however the machine would be for significantly
>> more than mere "development"; it would be a public service for building
>> > > * Large amount of bandwidth for downloads
> How much traffic is estimated ? A root server for 49 Euro/months in Germany
> has 1TB free traffic at 100Mbit and drops to 10MBit for unlimited traffic.
> There is now way to fight abuse of the servers as downloading is some sort of
> sport nowadays.
These days it is faster to download an image than having it burned and
shipped by mail for most people. Also most computers come not only
with CD burner but also DVD burner.
That's why people use the possibility.
> Is it acceptable to make this invitation only or do you favor an unlimited or
> not at all approach ?
> Lets say 100 invited projects build 10 images per day. That would be 30TB of
> data for the downloads.
I cannot speak for others, and especially since I am building my own
images anyway I am probably outside of the target audience of this
However, for me the requirement to get an invitation and watch to make
only so many images to not get over traffic quota is pretty much as
hard as building locally. Perhaps even more so given the procedure for
building is well documented and disk space is quite cheap so next to
everybody has a few spare GB on their disk.
Note that the few rebuilds restriction which is implied by bandwidth
limit actually harms D-L quite a bit. One of it's strengths are rapid
automatic rebuilds for updates and error corrections.
On the other hand, good upload bandwidth is expensive or even
impossible to get in many places. You can always use bittorrent or
similar and hope that you will get more seeds if your image gets
popular but you can do that on your home PC, too.
I do not see much point in this whole project if it is not reasonably open.
> One could alway bzip images.
Not applicable. They are already compressed.