W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > March to April 2003

Re: comments? mirrors.txt

From: Justin Chapweske <justin@chapweske.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 11:58:00 -0600
Message-ID: <3E89D328.3090808@chapweske.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, www-talk@w3.org

I agree with Mark.  In practice, IP->loc databases work quite well, and 
  usually latency and/or hop count is all you really need to pick a good 

Btw, Mark, I love your site - especially your cacheability engine.

Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>Traditionally mirrors provide a reference to their geographic
>>location. While by no means a guarantee to improved transfer
>>speeds, this is a useful reference, especially for clients that
>>wish to use a single source for data transfers (as opposed
>>to parallel downloads).
> I disagree; there are many, many factors to take into account when
> selecting a mirror; geographic location is quite low on the list, and can
> be found through other means in any case (see RFC1876).

Justin Chapweske, Onion Networks
Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2003 12:58:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:33:04 UTC