On 06/22/2012 02:24 PM, Darren Baginski wrote:
22.06.2012, 22:01, "Darren Baginski"<kickbsd@yandex.com>:
I've been working on a project that provides an alternative to
cdn.d.n. It
is based on http redirections.
An introduction can be found on the site itself[1], and a
comparison to
cdn.d.n at [2].
I now have setup a test instance in a host in Canada to allow
people to
actually test and use the system. This host is http.debian.net.
This is very bad idea, instead of having auto mirror selection
mechanism you've implemented classical Single Point of Failure
Proper implementation should loop over existing mirrors, starting
with less latency/faster transfer and then fallback/load balance to
another,
if file is not available. Unfortunately your solution is not solution
at all. Something close to proper implementation is used for fedora
infrastructure.
3xx per file redirect is not a scale-able solution.
Can you clarify what you mean by single point of failure? One would
think that having a redirector point towards several *matched* mirrors
in terms of load balancing, distance, consistency checks, and
newer/fresher mirrors would be of great benefit vs. picking a mirror and
discovering it is either down, out of sync, off-line, or otherwise
befallen. The master list is always available so one can still pick and
choose a favored mirror to override the http.d.o suggestion.