On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 10:47 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:12:45PM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > > Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > >On Sun, 2008-06-29 at 23:46 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > > >>The basic selection algorithm for choosing > > >>the order in which to return mirrors to clients remains the same: > > >>prefer same netblocks, internet2 in same country if on internet2, same > > >>country, same continent, then global, in that order. > > > > > >That's totally logical, but it's wrong for some cases. Here in Venezuela > > >there is much better bandwidth to the US than to anywhere else in South > > >America, so the "same continent" rule is not going to work for us. I > > >suspect the same is true for some other SA countries. > > Understood. But I don't have a way to know that. Of course. What's needed is a way to tune these things manually. > > The same is also true for Asia. I would hope that the "same continent" > > rule has a tad bit more smarts in it. > > Note, "same continent" is the 4th major sorting rule; if there are > mirrors in the same country, they will be preferred. We've got about > 150 public mirrors right now, and are always looking for more. I don't know of any in Venezuela at the moment. Furthermore, it's not even clear that a local mirror would be faster for everyone in the country. > I don't have a way to know the whole global routing table to know > which mirrors might be closer to individuals than others. So I'm > making what I think are pretty good guesses, and I don't get _too > many_ complaints about Fedora mirror performance. Except this one - > that slow mirrors were being overloaded, which last night's change > addresses. > > I'm open to better solutions, preferably in patch form. :-) > http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/mirrormanager has the open source code > for the whole system. My only suggestion for now is that the weighting of the various classes be changeable via a config file. I don't know if that is easy or hard to do given the existing code. > > >Also, for the relatively few people on Internet2 it's always better than > > >Internet1, at least here. I mean Internet2 to anywhere is better than > > >Internet1 to the same city. > > That all depends on the interconnects between the nodes on Internet2 > and the commerical internet. As those links cost real money for our > volunteer mirror admins, by request of some of the I2 mirrors in our > system, I've tried to avoid sending non-Internet2 users to Internet2 > servers. That's fine. I'm talking about I2<->I2 connections, which if available should outweigh non I2<->I2 connections even if the latter are more local. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
