I am unable to use BitTorrent due to being behind a firewall. Does anyone have the 4.3 DVD image available for download? Thanks.
>I am unable to use BitTorrent due to being behind a firewall. Does anyone >have the 4.3 DVD image available for download? >Don''t know about the rest of you guys, but for me, BitTorrent downloads are much slower than FTP. I was able to download the CDs at about 5-6 minutes each, the torrent took over 10 hours. I hereby cast a vote for the posting the DVD image. One image, or a set of files created with split(1). Jack
It''s not a matter of voting... it''s a matter of paying for the ftp server bandwidth. Using bittorrent you pay for the transfer by uploading a bit yourself, not to mention that many volunteers (like me) leave their bittorrents clients up and running long after they''re done downloading (I''ve already uploaded about 35 DVD''s worth). Cheers, MaZe. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Jack Bailey wrote:> >> I am unable to use BitTorrent due to being behind a firewall. Does anyone >> have the 4.3 DVD image available for download? >> > > Don''t know about the rest of you guys, but for me, BitTorrent downloads are > much slower than FTP. I was able to download the CDs at about 5-6 minutes > each, the torrent took over 10 hours. I hereby cast a vote for the posting > the DVD image. One image, or a set of files created with split(1). > > Jack > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >
wow. BT is keeping my pipe maxed out for the dvd image. Jack Bailey wrote:> >> I am unable to use BitTorrent due to being behind a firewall. Does >> anyone >> have the 4.3 DVD image available for download? >> > > Don''t know about the rest of you guys, but for me, BitTorrent downloads > are much slower than FTP. I was able to download the CDs at about 5-6 > minutes each, the torrent took over 10 hours. I hereby cast a vote for > the posting the DVD image. One image, or a set of files created with > split(1). > > Jack > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >-- My "Foundation" verse: Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD. -- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" CDTT (Certified Duct Tape Technician) Linux user #322099 Machines: 206822 256638 276825 http://counter.li.org/
Maciej ?enczykowski wrote:> It''s not a matter of voting... it''s a matter of paying for the ftp server > bandwidth. Using bittorrent you pay for the transfer by uploading a bit > yourself, not to mention that many volunteers (like me) leave their > bittorrents clients up and running long after they''re done downloading > (I''ve already uploaded about 35 DVD''s worth).What''s the difference between 4 CDs and 1 DVD split into 4 chunks? Nothing. If you want to make a case for distributing costs, then yank the CDs and make them only available as torrents as well. Jack
On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 14:11 -0800, Jack Bailey wrote:> Maciej ?enczykowski wrote: > > > It''s not a matter of voting... it''s a matter of paying for the ftp server > > bandwidth. Using bittorrent you pay for the transfer by uploading a bit > > yourself, not to mention that many volunteers (like me) leave their > > bittorrents clients up and running long after they''re done downloading > > (I''ve already uploaded about 35 DVD''s worth). > > > What''s the difference between 4 CDs and 1 DVD split into 4 chunks? > Nothing. If you want to make a case for distributing costs, then yank > the CDs and make them only available as torrents as well. >umm ... we are already distributing the CD ... if/when we distribute the DVD, that is, of course, that is an additional doubling of the size. The major issue with the DVD is still it''s size. At > 2gb (x12 arches) it is a problem to all but FTP and apache that has been given LFS support. So, Jack, are you writing the check to do (2.2gb/DVD)x(12 DVDS)x(100 mirrors)= 2640 GB = 2.64 TB just to get the DVDs to the mirrors. Also we are going to have a CentOS5 and CentOS6 probably before we get rid of centos-2 ... and there will be 4 arches (OR 11TB) just to transfer the DVDs to the mirrors them ... and it makes 26.4GBx4=105gb of mirror space just for DVDs .... I''m not sure you have completely though out the implications of your simple suggestion. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060322/3110e54a/attachment.bin
Jack Bailey wrote:> >> I am unable to use BitTorrent due to being behind a firewall. Does >> anyone >> have the 4.3 DVD image available for download? >> > > Don''t know about the rest of you guys, but for me, BitTorrent downloads > are much slower than FTP. I was able to download the CDs at about 5-6 > minutes each, the torrent took over 10 hours. I hereby cast a vote for > the posting the DVD image. One image, or a set of files created with > split(1). >you have a local problem on your end or a mis configured bittorrent client - look at this : at time of release, the DVD torrents were seeding ( for x86_64, i386 and ia64 together ) at over 1.3 GiB/sec. its only grown from there. And almost everyone who''s commented on it - has said that they have been able to saturate their links with the torrent ( eg. one guy on irc was leeching at 35MiB/sec earlier in the day today ... ) I find it hard to believe that in general terms, ftp would offer much better performance. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
>>>It''s not a matter of voting... it''s a matter of paying for the ftp server >>>bandwidth. Using bittorrent you pay for the transfer by uploading a bit >>>yourself, not to mention that many volunteers (like me) leave their >>>bittorrents clients up and running long after they''re done downloading >>>(I''ve already uploaded about 35 DVD''s worth). >>> >>> >>What''s the difference between 4 CDs and 1 DVD split into 4 chunks? >>Nothing. If you want to make a case for distributing costs, then yank >>the CDs and make them only available as torrents as well. >> >> >> > >umm ... we are already distributing the CD ... if/when we distribute the >DVD, that is, of course, that is an additional doubling of the size. > >The major issue with the DVD is still it''s size. At > 2gb (x12 arches) >it is a problem to all but FTP and apache that has been given LFS >support. > >So, Jack, are you writing the check to do (2.2gb/DVD)x(12 DVDS)x(100 >mirrors)= 2640 GB = 2.64 TB just to get the DVDs to the mirrors. > >Also we are going to have a CentOS5 and CentOS6 probably before we get >rid of centos-2 ... and there will be 4 arches (OR 11TB) just to >transfer the DVDs to the mirrors them ... and it makes 26.4GBx4=105gb of >mirror space just for DVDs .... > >I''m not sure you have completely though out the implications of your >You''re right, I did not think of the storage or getting them to the mirrors. I was thinking only of the act of downloading. That said, I think "who''s writing the check" is a strawman. Mirrors are provided by volunteers who can opt out any time they decide the costs are too great. Jack
> > you have a local problem on your end or a mis configured bittorrent > client - look at this : > > at time of release, the DVD torrents were seeding ( for x86_64, i386 and > ia64 together ) at over 1.3 GiB/sec. > > its only grown from there. And almost everyone who''s commented on it - > has said that they have been able to saturate their links with the > torrent ( eg. one guy on irc was leeching at 35MiB/sec earlier in the > day today ... ) > > I find it hard to believe that in general terms, ftp would offer much > better performance.I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP gets me about 1380KB/sec. Jack
If your in a business environment most likely you don''t have access to port forward to your client the port your client is configured to use. If a residential environment the same as above and/or traffic shaping by your ISP. I''m in a business environment with no port forwarding (I may be the network admin, but I have to live by the same rules I give users) running Azureus Client with torrents active for both i386 and x86_64 I was pulling 100k-200k each today. At home last night I was pulling 320k on my residential DSL (with port forwarding) for the same two torrents. Mileage may vary. -Kenneth> > you have a local problem on your end or a mis configured bittorrent > client - look at this : > > at time of release, the DVD torrents were seeding ( for x86_64, i386 > and > ia64 together ) at over 1.3 GiB/sec. > > its only grown from there. And almost everyone who''s commented on it -> has said that they have been able to saturate their links with the > torrent ( eg. one guy on irc was leeching at 35MiB/sec earlier in the > day today ... ) > > I find it hard to believe that in general terms, ftp would offer much > better performance.I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP gets me about 1380KB/sec. Jack _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Jack Bailey wrote:> >> >> you have a local problem on your end or a mis configured bittorrent >> client - look at this : >> >> at time of release, the DVD torrents were seeding ( for x86_64, i386 and >> ia64 together ) at over 1.3 GiB/sec. >> >> its only grown from there. And almost everyone who''s commented on it - >> has said that they have been able to saturate their links with the >> torrent ( eg. one guy on irc was leeching at 35MiB/sec earlier in the >> day today ... ) >> >> I find it hard to believe that in general terms, ftp would offer much >> better performance. > > I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent > connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP > gets me about 1380KB/sec. >surely, these are not centos DVD image torrents you are talking about here ? if they are - can you give me some time scales as to when you had this sort of a speed issue ? -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
On Wed, March 22, 2006 5:55 pm, Karanbir Singh said:> Jack Bailey wrote: >>similarCD >>> >>> you have a local problem on your end or a mis configured bittorrent >>> client - look at this : >>> >>> at time of release, the DVD torrents were seeding ( for x86_64, i386 >>> and >>> ia64 together ) at over 1.3 GiB/sec. >>> >>> its only grown from there. And almost everyone who''s commented on it - >>> has said that they have been able to saturate their links with the >>> torrent ( eg. one guy on irc was leeching at 35MiB/sec earlier in the >>> day today ... ) >>> >>> I find it hard to believe that in general terms, ftp would offer much >>> better performance. >> >> I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent >> connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP >> gets me about 1380KB/sec. >> > > surely, these are not centos DVD image torrents you are talking about > here ? if they are - can you give me some time scales as to when you > had this sort of a speed issue ? >I''ve been experiencing similar speeds as those described by Jack all day today. The 4-CD torrent was really fast, but the one for the DVD has been much slower. Marko
>> >> I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent >> connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP >> gets me about 1380KB/sec. >> > > surely, these are not centos DVD image torrents you are talking about > here ? if they are - can you give me some time scales as to when you > had this sort of a speed issue ?Yes, the DVD torrents. I started the DVD download last night about 9:00PM. I went to bed at 3:00AM, with 5 hours, 20 minutes remaining of download time remaining. This morning I checked the file modification time which works out to a total download time of about 10 hours, 50 minutes. Contrast this to downloading all 4 CDs in under 30 minutes. I''ll put my money where my mouth is and buy the DVD. At this point I''m probably coming off as ungrateful which is certainly not the case. Jack
Jack Bailey wrote:> >>> >>> I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent >>> connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP >>> gets me about 1380KB/sec. >>> >> >> surely, these are not centos DVD image torrents you are talking about >> here ? if they are - can you give me some time scales as to when you >> had this sort of a speed issue ? > > Yes, the DVD torrents. I started the DVD download last night about > 9:00PM. I went to bed at 3:00AM, with 5 hours, 20 minutes remaining of > download time remaining. This morning I checked the file modification > time which works out to a total download time of about 10 hours, 50 > minutes. Contrast this to downloading all 4 CDs in under 30 minutes.am looking at this issue right now... -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
On 3/22/06, Jack Bailey <jack@internetguy.net> wrote:> > >> > >> I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent > >> connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP > >> gets me about 1380KB/sec.For those of you outside the business arena and suffering speed issues, it may be that iptables is not accepting incoming requests on the right ports or ISP bandwidth throttling is biting you. With most bt clients, there''s nothing stopping you from providing it a different port range (and some bt trackers actually require this) so that you can bypass any potential issues. I do this frequently if I notice a problem, and I was able to pull the DVD at around 700K/s, which is acceptable to me. -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety'''' Benjamin Franklin 1775
Quoting Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@karan.org>:> Jack Bailey wrote: > > > >>> > >>> I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent > >>> connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP > >>> gets me about 1380KB/sec. > >>> > >> > >> surely, these are not centos DVD image torrents you are talking about > >> here ? if they are - can you give me some time scales as to when you > >> had this sort of a speed issue ? > > > > Yes, the DVD torrents. I started the DVD download last night about > > 9:00PM. I went to bed at 3:00AM, with 5 hours, 20 minutes remaining of > > download time remaining. This morning I checked the file modification > > time which works out to a total download time of about 10 hours, 50 > > minutes. Contrast this to downloading all 4 CDs in under 30 minutes.Would it be possible for whomever makes the DVD to provide a script to build the DVD from the CD ISO images? That way, anyone who wants to make their own DVD can do so. Barry
I''m working on this (via jigdo). Hopefully will be ready within 24 hours. Cheers, MaZe.> Would it be possible for whomever makes the DVD to provide a script to build the > DVD from the CD ISO images? That way, anyone who wants to make their own DVD > can do so.
Barry Brimer wrote:> Quoting Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@karan.org>: > >> Jack Bailey wrote: >>>>> I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent >>>>> connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP >>>>> gets me about 1380KB/sec. >>>>> >>>> surely, these are not centos DVD image torrents you are talking about >>>> here ? if they are - can you give me some time scales as to when you >>>> had this sort of a speed issue ? >>> Yes, the DVD torrents. I started the DVD download last night about >>> 9:00PM. I went to bed at 3:00AM, with 5 hours, 20 minutes remaining of >>> download time remaining. This morning I checked the file modification >>> time which works out to a total download time of about 10 hours, 50 >>> minutes. Contrast this to downloading all 4 CDs in under 30 minutes. > > Would it be possible for whomever makes the DVD to provide a script to build the > DVD from the CD ISO images? That way, anyone who wants to make their own DVD > can do so. >there is a script, posted a few times to the mailing list now - that lets you do this sort of a thing. ( or look at : http://mirror.centos.org/centos/build/ for the mkdvdiso.sh script ) HTH -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Barry Brimer wrote:> Quoting Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@karan.org>: > > > Jack Bailey wrote: > > > > > >>> > > >>> I do believe that something is wrong with the setup. I get torrent > > >>> connection speeds that vary wildly from 10KB/sec to about 200KB/sec. FTP > > >>> gets me about 1380KB/sec. > > >>> > > >> > > >> surely, these are not centos DVD image torrents you are talking about > > >> here ? if they are - can you give me some time scales as to when you > > >> had this sort of a speed issue ? > > > > > > Yes, the DVD torrents. I started the DVD download last night about > > > 9:00PM. I went to bed at 3:00AM, with 5 hours, 20 minutes remaining of > > > download time remaining. This morning I checked the file modification > > > time which works out to a total download time of about 10 hours, 50 > > > minutes. Contrast this to downloading all 4 CDs in under 30 minutes. > > Would it be possible for whomever makes the DVD to provide a script to build the > DVD from the CD ISO images? That way, anyone who wants to make their own DVD > can do so.It is called mkdvdiso.sh and is in the build directory of centos mirrors :- http://mirror.centos.org/centos/build/ Regards Lance -- uklinux.net - The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Maciej ?enczykowski wrote:> I''m working on this (via jigdo).Cool - I did look at jigdo but gave it up as a bad job. and anyway - mkdvdiso.sh does it easily ... Regards Lance> Hopefully will be ready within 24 hours. > > Cheers, > MaZe. > > > Would it be possible for whomever makes the DVD to provide a script to build the > > DVD from the CD ISO images? That way, anyone who wants to make their own DVD > > can do so. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >-- uklinux.net - The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.
Jack Bailey wrote:> Yes, the DVD torrents. I started the DVD download last night about > 9:00PM. I went to bed at 3:00AM, with 5 hours, 20 minutes remaining of > download time remaining. This morning I checked the file modification > time which works out to a total download time of about 10 hours, 50 > minutes. Contrast this to downloading all 4 CDs in under 30 minutes. >we''ve added a few more centos.org machines into the torrent pool to feed the binDVD''s out ( thanks hughesjr !! ) I''ve also added another 1024KiB/sec upload capacity to the torrent externally ( hosted out of the US ), and we have 220+ Seeders. Set the refresh rate ( --rerequest_interval ) to something low - like maybe 20 min ( the default is 300 minutes ) , and retry the torrent, you _should_ see a much faster download rate now. Also a big thanks to everyone who is helping seed... -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
Jack Bailey wrote:> >So, Jack, are you writing the check to do (2.2gb/DVD)x(12 DVDS)x(100 > >mirrors)= 2640 GB = 2.64 TB just to get the DVDs to the mirrors.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> That said, I think "who''s writing the check" is a strawman. Mirrors are > provided by volunteers who can opt out any time they decide the costs > are too great.I underlined the important part for you. Ralph -- Ralph Angenendt......ra@br-online.de | .."Text processing has made it possible Bayerischer Rundfunk...80300 M?nchen | ....to right-justify any idea, even one Programmbereich.Bayern 3, Jugend und | .which cannot be justified on any other Multimedia.........Tl:089.5900.16023 | ..........grounds." -- J. Finnegan, USC -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060323/29ff04a3/attachment.bin