On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 12:29:10PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Dec 02, Stefano Zacchiroli <z...@debian.org> wrote: > > > That would allow mirroring, would reduce > > worries of being "shaped down" by specific cloud providers if we exceed some > Is this actually a real concern? As a cloud provider, I find hard to > believe that one would damage their customers this way. >
I also don't see much of that scenario. Either for private clouds, what an AMI really offer is a software component that will be used on your platform and people will rely on. You, as provider, don't want to loose credibility. > > traffic thresholds and, generally, benefit our independence from specific > > providers. > > > > Next action on this: contact debian-cd, point them to some of the images we > > already have (only EC2 at the moment) and ask their take about including > > them > > in the usual "CD"/media mirror network. > Are the EC2 images also usable as is on other Amazon-like cloud > infrastructures? If they are not, then I do not see the point of using > our own resources for the benefit of a specific cloud provider. > EC2 AMIs can be converted[1] to EMIs (Eucalyptus). This also has to do with the fact that Eucalyptus is API-compatible with Amazon EC2. 1- https://github.com/eucalyptus/eucalyptus/wiki/Convert-AMI-to-EMI -- Rudy Godoy http://stone-head.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org