<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
A lot of mirrors do this anyways. ISO's are big files, HTTP wasn't made
to move big files. Most people do this just so the user has a better
chance of the download completing successfully.<br>
<br>
On 11/25/2009 6:10 PM, Pär Andersson wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:87zl6anqtk.fsf@nsc.liu.se" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Mogens Kjaer <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mk@crc.dk"><mk@crc.dk></a> writes:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Redirecting http requests to ftp solved the problem:
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Is this really ok on a CentOS mirror? In the mirror list it says that
you support HTTP but with this config that is not true for ISOs.
For most people this probably makes no difference, but there are
networks where stupid NAT and/or firewalls lets you access HTTP but not
FTP.
I limit the amount of connections/IP to 2 for the ISOs instead, this
seems to work quite ok against download accelerators.
--
Pär Andersson
</pre>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
CentOS-mirror mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CentOS-mirror@centos.org">CentOS-mirror@centos.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-mirror">http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-mirror</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>