John Summerfield wrote: > Jim Perrin wrote: >>> Does this mean you don't wish to create a workable mirror system? >> >> >> Just because it doesn't fit into how you think it should work doesn't >> mean it's not workable. Stop trolling. >> > > I'm not trolling, I pointed out a serious problem with it and suggest > how it could be improved. > > I repeat, mirrors in Europe & the US are not local to Western > Australia, and while Singapore is relatively close, still data crosses > national boundaries; while I don't understand the implications of > that, I am sure it doesn't have the same costs & rules that data-flows > within Austealia have. Who cares? When I think of "local" in terms of an update mirror, all I care about is latency (less so) and bandwidth (more so)...the fact that a particular host is located in Perth or Ulan Bator or Los Angeles really isn't important to me. Getting the bits from point A to point B in the quickest and most reliable fashion IS important. I don't understand why you're so hung up on server location as physical geography is becoming less and less relevant as the world becomes more and more wired. Cheers,