On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:15:53 -0600, Ron Hunter-Duvar wrote > On September 18, 2004 15:18, Hoyt Bailey wrote: > > On Saturday 18 September 2004 14:02, Dennis Myers wrote: > > > On Saturday 18 September 2004 12:57 pm, Hoyt Bailey wrote: > > > > On Saturday 18 September 2004 12:35, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 2004-09-18 at 13:16, Dennis Myers wrote: > > > > > > Is anyone else d/ling the 10.1 community on bt? I have discs 4 > > > > > > and 5 very quickly but the CD1-3 torrent is very slow. At best > > > > > > I get 10kbs. I have checked all the settings and do not know > > > > > > what to do to make it d/l faster. Any suggestions? TIA for > > > > > > your > > > > > > recommendations. > > > > > > > > > > Doing the same and getting the same. I've got the proper ports > > > > > opened up and AFAIK the configuration is correct. > > > > > > > > > > Similar 10.0.2 download was 80k or better on average. > > > > > > > > > > I don't know how to fix. > > > > > > > > > > LX > > > > > > > > Dont use torrent??? > > > > > > Good suggestion, but I have not found the mirrors with just the iso's > > > and thus bittorrent is the only way at the moment. I usually have > > > had very fast response on bittorrent. : P > > > > I haven't tried bittorrent because I'v seen too many complaints like > > yours. Somehow its not ready for prime time. > > The problem with bt is just the number of others that have it > running on the same torrent. It kind of works opposite to regular > downloading. With a regular d/l, where everyone is hitting the same > server, the more users, the slower it gets. But with bt, the more > users the faster it gets. > > I got pretty good speed out of bt for 10.1C, but maybe it was just > my timing. I left it running for a while to help out others who were > downloading, but I needed the disk space, so I had to burn them and > delete them. When I'm done some repartitioning, I'll put them back > and restart bt. > > If everyone with a high speed connection leaves their bt running > even after the d/l is finished, it will help out others, at a > modest cost in bandwidth consumed. Even if you don't plan to use > 10.1C immediately, if you have the bandwidth and the disk space, d/w > with bt, and you'll help out others.
Or... The ISOs could be distributed to many more reliable mirrors where highband width is a planned feature easily accomodated. Then we wouldn't have to all be pointed at the same mirror fighting for access or waiting on 30 dial-up bt users with an expected completion time of 300 hrs. Let the mirrors use bt to update, I believe that would suit their model best. As for the rest of us, the best case bt scenario is exactly equal to a good mirror, where as the worst case is simply laughable. I don't see that as progress, just an excuse for mirrors to shrug their responsibility. What Mandrake really needs is a centrally managed mirror list that ACTIVELY checks the status of other mirrors, listing only those that are up and properly organized. It should be a no brainer to register your mirror with Mandrake and likewise have your mirror checked for consistency automatically to be listed. Heck, do away with the whole urpmi/easyurpmi media snafu all together and dynamically pick the mirror with the least overload for every update. That would easily free up the mirrors of the world and redistribute plenty of bandwidth. Of course, that's just my opinion (slow day)... Scott -- Nothing goes to waste when Little Fish are near! (http://www.littlefish.ca)
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
