On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:56:37AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 11:03:16PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > > ]] Josh Triplett > > > > Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > > > > I personally recommend using deb.debian.org. > > > > > > > > That works nicely, thanks! Seems to have decent performance. > > > > Ah, that makes sense. I look forward to the announcement. > > > > When you make the announcement, can you include a link to the details of > > the CDN, such as the extent of its caching servers? That would help > > people determine if using it will likely produce good results for them. > > The locality of this CDN seems to be... not the best. > > In Poland, there's 11 mirrors (according to choose-mirror 2.69), and > httpredir.debian.net always gives me one of those. Not the closest one > network- or geography- wise, but in a country the size of Poland, that's > good enough. > > deb.debian.org on the other hand, trying from two locations over three ISPs: > Starogard Gdański/Netia, Starogard Gdański/UPC, Gdańsk/Limes: > * IPv6: Amsterdam or London > * IPv4: MIT, San Francisco, London
Just to confirm, did you use SRV records for this check as apt does, or did you check the path to deb.debian.org's A or AAAA records directly? If I ping deb.debian.org directly, it resolves to various mirrors, with ping times ranging from 20ms to 200ms away. The SRV records, though, point to a CDN server that reliably gets 20ms. (I don't actually know the benefit of using SRV records here.) - Josh Triplett
