John Summerfield wrote:
Lance Davis wrote:
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, John Summerfield wrote:
You haven't shown how the mirroring system find a good mirror, and the evidence Johnny gave shows it doesn't.
Ehhh ???
The shortest "wire" was thousands of kilometres long. From a networking POV, that's not good.
I know about Coriolis being different down under, but speed of light also?
Your mirror system doesn't show them to users, and that's a problem to those users whom it costs.
We only list mirrors that tell us they want to be listed. We are not about to go searching the net to find other ones.
I'm only an ignorant user, I don't know how the Centos organisation works or how you found the systems you do list.
Well, then *think*.
I've been using the Internet for quite a few years; when I was learning its ins & outs, I read that one should choose a mirror that is relatively local (as measured by the wire).
Yeah, that latency can get annoying if you go around the earth ~7 times.
There aren't that many wires out of Perth, and they're very long ones, so from our perspective geographic locality and topological locality are pretty much the same.
Use of mirrors on the opposite side of the globe when there's a nearer choice just goes to tie up bandwidth needlessly, increasing costs for all. It's a bad idea.
Then CentOS has to *KNOW* about these mirrors. If we don't - how do you expect those mirrors to get listed? By probing each ftp server world wide?
There were several other mirrors listed, so there were other mirrors available.
Yes. Mirrors which the CentOS team *knew* about.
Ralph