Re: Possibly moving Debian services to a CDN
(cc email@example.com, the list where such discussions can happen)
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 09:00:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Joey Hess <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > But apparently not one solved by free software included in Debian.
> > Perhaps it's worth avoiding using it if that will help encourage the
> > development of libre alternatives.
> CDNs aren't really software problems. They're infrastructure and network
> peering problems. I think all the software required is in Debian, but the
> data centers, peering arragements, route advertisements, and so forth are
> things that only make sense to do at a larger scale than a single project.
We already have a network of almost 400 packages mirrors around the world.
Using http.d.n, provides the CDN layer (not as much as optimal as anycast), so
we don't need to sort ourselves peering issues etc.
> We can do a home-brewed CDN -- that, after all, is what the various
> services referenced in the original message are. But one of the
> commercial CDNs will have better performance and better load distribution
> than one can do with software-only solutions without the peering setup and
> data center distribution.
* Commercial CDN have no knowledge of debian archive datamodel and
constraints, which leads to inconsistency (and consequently hash sum dismatch).
Or this would imply just disabling caching for problematic files, or change
apt/dak so that the archive is less impacted by synchro atomicity issues.
* My own experience is different, http.d.n redirects to ftp2.fr, which i got
10,2Mo/s, while cloudfront.d.n (Amazon) gives 5Mo/s.
email@example.com team member