From: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site?
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 15:20:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020120152031.2f39201c.skraw@ithnet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a2d46c$9c2$1@cesium.transmeta.com>
In-Reply-To: <a2d46c$9c2$1@cesium.transmeta.com>
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
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-20 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-20 0:49 Would anyone be willing to host a second kernel.org site? H. Peter Anvin
2002-01-20 1:10 ` Larry McVoy
2002-01-20 1:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-01-20 1:30 ` Larry McVoy
2002-01-20 4:06 ` Craig I. Hagan
2002-01-20 19:31 ` Ricky Beam
2002-01-20 14:20 ` Stephan von Krawczynski [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020120152031.2f39201c.skraw@ithnet.com \
--to=skraw@ithnet.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox