Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 09:20:47 -0500 From: Joe Abley <jabley@automagic.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> Subject: Re: [PATCH] add a SITE MD5 command to ftpd Message-ID: <20010315092047.E8289@buddha.home.automagic.org> In-Reply-To: <20010314105918.A5204@roaming.cacheboy.net>; from adrian@FreeBSD.ORG on Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 10:59:18AM %2B0100 References: <20010313211544.B17733@ringworld.oblivion.bg> <200103140459.VAA03061@usr05.primenet.com> <20010314084651.A23104@ringworld.oblivion.bg> <20010314012132.A91957@dragon.nuxi.com> <20010314105918.A5204@roaming.cacheboy.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 10:59:18AM +0100, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > > > How will a site that pretends to have this capability yet does not; not > > make things worse than today? The only way for that to be the case is > > for nothing/one to trust the result of "SITE MD5 filename" for *any* > > purpose. If that is the case, why have the "feature"? > > "Throw more Bandwidth at it" is a short-sighted answer. When we have say, > 30,000 ports in our collection, how do you scale having to download each > one to check? > > Lets see. If it were me, I'd take a bunch of machines, distribute them > around the world at strategic network points, run a little "mapper" to > map each box to the closest URLs in the ports collection, and have each > box download them locally. > > *OR*, someone can write a patch to add something like SITE MD5 to the > bsd ftpd, perhaps someone can then do the same to wu-ftpd and proftpd, > and then write a small RFC snippet explaining why its a good idea and > see if they can get it ratified. Then, you can have a single box at > yahoo handle 30,000 ports by simply doing MD5 checks, rather than 30,000 > ports by downloading each tarball. *OR* you could distribute the problem the way it is naturally distributed, and build a mechanism whereby a downloaded distfile that fails its MD5 check on any recent build of FreeBSD causes a notification to be sent back to the mother ship. You would make this an optional feature, and stick a question in sysinstall which explains the benefits of doing it. At the mother ship, you would discard all information from the incoming broken-md5 mail except for the origin of the distfile, its length, it's real MD5 and it's ports-MD5. Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010315092047.E8289>