Re: Possibly moving Debian services to a CDN
On Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 21:01:08 +0200, Simon Paillard wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 07:54:04PM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > This one time, at band camp, Simon Paillard said:
> > > 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.
> > The mirrors do a very good job of being near to our users in most cases
> > (we have had some difficulty with things like security mirror coverage,
> > but that's not your issue). I know many people are happy with http.d.n,
> > but you have to understand that it's not the same thing at all as a CDN -
> > it's a single host, and it's in a single location. Time to first byte
> > will still suffer if you're coming from Australia.
> Obviously, it's due to current unsponsored deployment.
> * For a package of several kB, the first bytes (actually ~800B, measured) are
> not meaningful
> * Our (firstname.lastname@example.org) is to have http.d.n made official so that we can have an
> instance like on each continent, then use GeoDNS, like security.d.o mirrors, to
> achieve 2 goals: avoid SPOF, be closer to users.
in long term, i would like to get rid of our GeoDNS setup.
Martin Zobel-Helas <email@example.com> Debian System Administrator
Debian & GNU/Linux Developer Debian Listmaster
http://about.me/zobel Debian Webmaster
GPG Fingerprint: 6B18 5642 8E41 EC89 3D5D BDBB 53B1 AC6D B11B 627B