Fedora Core 2 Distribution Size

[Gene C.]

On Friday 02 January 2004 14:37, seth vidal wrote:
> > Personal experience...and things you have heard...are anecdotal. My ftp
> > and http installs work..swimmingly. Shall I assume it works perfectly
> > for everyone else...nope. But saying your problems and the problems you
> > heard about are specifically issues with anaconda is a bit naive.
> > Pointing out bugreports in bugzilla on the issue, is marginally less
> > naive.
> >
> > -jef"off to do an ftp install using boot.iso right now"spaleta
>
> I'd like to encourage everyone to NOT use ftp. Use http. It's better for
> servers, it tends to be more performant, it tunnels more nicely and
> historically has been less of a security wreck than ftp.
>
> Seriously, you should actually get better performance out of MANY of the
> good http servers.
>
> ftp is heavier, it eats up more processes and responds less well,
> frequently.

In general, http is "encouraged" for downloading of updates and individual 
packages for FC (up2date also uses it).  To me this makes lots of sense since 
the various proxy servers in the network can do a much better job of load 
balancing than running multiple ftp servers with rotating access via dns.

However, I noticed that when the ISOs are downloaded, ftp is forced.  Is there 
some reason for this.  I would think that the same load balancing logic that 
applied for packages would also ally to the ISO images.
-- 
Gene