Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

[H. Peter Anvin]

The recent troubles we've had at kernel.org pretty much highlight the
issues with having an offsite system with no easy physical access.
This begs the question if we could establish another primary
kernel.org site; this would not only reduce the load on any one site
but deal with any one failure in a much more graceful way.

Anyone have any ideas of some organization who would be willing to
host a second kernel.org server?  Such an organization should expect
around 25 Mbit/s sustained traffic, and up to 40-100 Mbit/s peak
traffic (this one can be adjusted to fit the available resources.)

If so, please contact me...

	-hpa
-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt	<amsp@zytor.com>

Re: Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

[Larry McVoy]

On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 04:49:16PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> The recent troubles we've had at kernel.org pretty much highlight the
> issues with having an offsite system with no easy physical access.
> This begs the question if we could establish another primary
> kernel.org site; this would not only reduce the load on any one site
> but deal with any one failure in a much more graceful way.
> 
> Anyone have any ideas of some organization who would be willing to
> host a second kernel.org server?  Such an organization should expect
> around 25 Mbit/s sustained traffic, and up to 40-100 Mbit/s peak
> traffic (this one can be adjusted to fit the available resources.)

We've priced this lately and I think the cheapest you are looking at is
around $6500/month for a 25Mbit connection.  That's not a huge amount of
money but it's enough that it shows up on people's radar screens as a line
item, it's $80K/year, so there would have to be some justification.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 

Re: Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

[H. Peter Anvin]

Followup to:  <20020119171013.T30683@work.bitmover.com>
By author:    Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> 
> We've priced this lately and I think the cheapest you are looking at is
> around $6500/month for a 25Mbit connection.  That's not a huge amount of
> money but it's enough that it shows up on people's radar screens as a line
> item, it's $80K/year, so there would have to be some justification.
> 

No doubt.  In this similar vein, it's probably good to point out to
people just how much ISC's contribution to kernel.org is actually
worth...

	-hpa
-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt	<amsp@zytor.com>

Re: Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

[Larry McVoy]

On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 05:18:57PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Followup to:  <20020119171013.T30683@work.bitmover.com>
> By author:    Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> > 
> > We've priced this lately and I think the cheapest you are looking at is
> > around $6500/month for a 25Mbit connection.  That's not a huge amount of
> > money but it's enough that it shows up on people's radar screens as a line
> > item, it's $80K/year, so there would have to be some justification.
> 
> No doubt.  In this similar vein, it's probably good to point out to
> people just how much ISC's contribution to kernel.org is actually
> worth...

No kidding.  I didn't realize they were hosting it, that's very nice
of them.

Do you have any statistics on what percentage of the download traffic
is whole kernels versus patches?  If most of the traffic is whole kernels,
I think I might be able to offer up a fix for that.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 

Re: Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

[Craig I. Hagan]

> Do you have any statistics on what percentage of the download traffic
> is whole kernels versus patches?  If most of the traffic is whole kernels,
> I think I might be able to offer up a fix for that.

this is something that hooking into a cache heirarchy (e.g. NLANR)
might help resolve.

-- craig



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig I. Hagan     "It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to back it up"
hagan(at)cih.com        "True hackers don't die, their ttl expires"
  	"It takes a village to raise an idiot, but an idiot can raze a village"

	Stop the spread of spam, use a sendmail condom!
	     http://www.cih.com/~hagan/smtpd-hacks

                       In Bandwidth we trust

Re: Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

[Stephan von Krawczynski]

On 19 Jan 2002 16:49:16 -0800
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:

> The recent troubles we've had at kernel.org pretty much highlight the
> issues with having an offsite system with no easy physical access.
> This begs the question if we could establish another primary
> kernel.org site; this would not only reduce the load on any one site
> but deal with any one failure in a much more graceful way.
> 
> Anyone have any ideas of some organization who would be willing to
> host a second kernel.org server?  Such an organization should expect
> around 25 Mbit/s sustained traffic, and up to 40-100 Mbit/s peak
> traffic (this one can be adjusted to fit the available resources.)
> 
> If so, please contact me...

Hello Peter,

I don't know if this could be any real help, but anyway I have a slightly
different suggestion, that may be interesting. Years ago we did a DNS-project
that allows to spread a domain to several _different_ ip locations based on the
dns-_requesting_ ip. You may know such a technique from akamai (MS daughter).
In fact we implemented and test-runned it years ago, but did not find any
customer interested (in fact only real big customers _can_ be interested at
all, and we didn't have the "connections"). Anyway the know-how is still here
and can be used to help kernel.org, if interested. The basic idea is, that this
splits costs in running kernel.org to several locations. These locations can
(e.g.) be providers who may have some strategic interests. You may as well come
up with a GNU project of spreading kernel.org mirrors - meaning every provider
be it small or big can have its own mirror, and _only_ his customers (depending
on their IP or his AS) are using it. So if you have a major breakdown at the
primary server, people will get no _new_ pages, but kernel.org itself looks up
throughout all IP-ranges that have a mirror "attached".

What do you think?

Regards,
Stephan von Krawczynski

Re: Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?

[Ricky Beam]

On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Larry McVoy wrote:
>> Anyone have any ideas of some organization who would be willing to
>> host a second kernel.org server?  Such an organization should expect
>> around 25 Mbit/s sustained traffic, and up to 40-100 Mbit/s peak
>> traffic (this one can be adjusted to fit the available resources.)
>
>We've priced this lately and I think the cheapest you are looking at is
>around $6500/month for a 25Mbit connection.  That's not a huge amount of
>money but it's enough that it shows up on people's radar screens as a line
>item, it's $80K/year, so there would have to be some justification.

Yep.  I still laugh at those who say "bandwidth is free."  They've obviously
never bought anything from UUNet.  At any rate, a full DS3 (45mbps) will
run between 7k and 20k USD per _month_.  Last time I checked, kernel.org
didn't have the funds for 7k/year much less per month.

Server colocation is a far cheaper solution, but then they have the
same problems they have now... limited access to the hardware when something
goes wrong (and it always does.)

--Ricky