Mirror.ac.uk to Scale Back Operations 118
KingDaveRa writes "It would seem that the UK's Joint Information Systems Committee (www.jisc.ac.uk) have decided to withdraw funding from the www.mirror.ac.uk service. They still want to run a service, but '...perhaps on a smaller scale, and limited to the most popular mirrors. This would, however, depend upon securing sponsorship or alternative funding very quickly, and the approval of our host institutions.' This could turn out to be quite an inconvenience for the UK, as the mirror.ac.uk service has proven itself very fast and reliable."
Well, bugger. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:5, Insightful)
For one thing its just a mirror, all that software is available on hundreds of other sites.
For another the only people who will noticed the difference between mirror.ac.uk and any european FTP site are those on janet (joint academic network). I'll be quite annoyed at getting 800kb/sec instead of 2MB/sec at uni but I'm sure I'll cope
Strange though, I'd have thought at the end of the day this is just going to cost JANET more as they're now going to have to pay someone external for the bandwidth for all those linux isos the students leech.
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not just a mirror. It's a particularly fast and comprehensive mirror. It's always up, and has everything you need. OK, so I don't get the full benefit, but it's still much better than the alternatives, and I still get 3.5MB/s downloads, even without being on JANET. This is not a good day for those in the UK.
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:5, Interesting)
Until very recently, I worked at mirror.ac.uk part-time (I'm even still on staff page, if you know where to find it).
I don't think many people realise how much effort has gone into developing and improving the mirror service. The service has always been a love of much of the staff, and we're all sad to see it go (and not just because it's costing us jobs). Like any lover, it's been a painful journey - intractible hardware, elusive bugs, the JANET core network doing strange things - but it's all be fun.
Most of my work was stuff you didn't see - helping work on backend stability, hardware maintenance, the indexer for the search engine (yes, blame me, but the engine itself was someone else's), and reporting data to the funders.
Another often-overlooked point is the fact that we are so much more than a mirror service - a customised and effective search engine, a browsing interface that lets you look inside many archive and package formats (including RPMs and DEBs), and e even offer users support and assistance.
So I for one will be sad to see it go, and will hold a wake on the day of shutdown (I'll be inviting my former workmates).
Sam
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:1)
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:2)
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:1, Interesting)
Er, someone else bid lower to run the mirroring service and that's going to cost JANET more money. How do you figure that out?
That, unfortunately, is life in public tenders. You might personally be comfortable sticking with an existing supplier, with a good track record, but that doesn't cut it when
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, a cheaper service may (and certainlly initially probably can't) mirror such a comprehensive list of software. That means people will stop using the new service, and download elsewhere.
If people on the JANET stop using the mirror service provided
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:4, Informative)
I'm frankly amazed they bid cheaper, but we don't know all the details. We already have the kit (that belongs to Lancaster and Kent unis), and the software (that too), and the mirroring agreements and existing data (they don't get copies of that, either).
However, AIUI (I wasn't involved in the tendering), we wanted to continue adding value to the mirror service, make it more reliable, more easy to use, offering more advanced access systems, and lots of cool features. I believe the winning tender was single-site, bare-bones service, from a JISC 'Strategic Partner'.
Oh, and tenders don't have to go to the lowest bidder. When UKMS formed, it had a slightly more expensive bid than the competition, but the promise of added-value and dual-site operation won us the day. I wasn't there then, either, but I've been told by the folks that were.
SamBC
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:1)
The experience of the UKMS team is huge, the connectivity to the UKMS nodes means that any one university should be no more than 4 or 5 hops from the nearest UKMS node and most importantly it is all within Janet. No matter how many li
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:2, Informative)
I presume that this means that JANET won't lose much money through external charges as institutions are being charged for access to mirror.ac.uk now anyway, and if costs go up they can just increase the charge to institutions...
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:1)
JA.NET used to fund a proxy service that the institutions could link up to (for free) however this was closed in late 2002, details are still online wwwcache.ja.net [ja.net]
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:1)
UK ISPs tend to more or less directly peer with JANET, through MaNAP [manap.net] and LINX [linx.net] for example, and so get speedy access to services hosted on JANET. Connections to hosts in the rest of Europe often have to go through at least an extra level of indirection, which makes a bit of a difference.
Re:Well, bugger. (Score:1)
Who cares? (Score:1)
Why? Who cares - it's just another FTP or whatever site.
>That's going to have quite a knock-on effect to all of the software hosted there, particularly a lot of the free stuff
Actually this is a good example of "free" - someone was actually paying for this so it actually wasn't free, it was more like a social service.
Still, like I said above, who cares - the very fact that the whole thing is a _mirror_ means the files hosted there exist somewhere else on the Net.
And that
Re:Who cares? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really. This was hosted by the UK academic network, so it was paid for by a combination of tuition fees and UK taxes.
The primary beneficiaries would be people studying or working at UK universities, or people living in the UK -- ie, the very people who are paying for it, albeit indirectly. Yes, other people can also make use of it, but that's part of the principle of reciprocity that the whole of the internet was originally based on. That's the basis on which the content was provided that is populating the mirrors.
Why would anyone feel upset about this
Because it's an inconvenience? Because it's short sighted? Because it's a poor use of resources? Because it's yet another example of bean counters who don't understand the value of the thing that they are cutting?
more info (Score:1)
From the JISC Monitoring Unit, also based at Kent.
Dupe (Score:5, Informative)
Email address (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Email address (Score:2, Informative)
(Press release [jisc.ac.uk])
Re:Email address (Score:2)
Re:Email address (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Email address (Score:2)
Re:Email address (Score:1)
Was this.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Was this.. (Score:5, Informative)
For those outside the UK, you may want to take a look at the front page of todays Mirror [bbc.co.uk]
Re:Was this.. (Score:1, Insightful)
The government were entirely in the right in this case. I'm as anti-war as the next guy, but those pictures should never have been published.
Mods on crack? (Score:2)
Re:Was this.. (Score:5, Insightful)
So instead of it being soldiers engaged in acts that have been reported to the government already, it is solders faking sick and degrading behaviour and passing these off as real to a newspaper. Either because they are mentally disturbed psychotics who get a kick out that sort of behaviour or in an attempt to set up the newspaper.
Now call me picky, but one is confirmation that the army has some sick and twisted soldiers while the other is confirmation that the army has some sick and twisted soldiers. The only difference is that the mirror has paid for its opposition to the war by being set up - in either event it shows that there is something fundamentally broken in the discipline and behaviour of British soldiers.
Yes, Morgan isn't a nice man, I can't stand the guy, but what is going on here stinks of an attempt to midirect the public away from the very real and serious allegations that respectable organisations have been making about British behaviour in the gulf towards a mud-slinging match against a paper that has been a thorn in the side of the government since the start of last year.
Re:Was this.. (Score:4, Informative)
<snip>...only for it to be show (by the Military police...) that the photos are faked (apparently by matching scratches on vehicles no less.)..<snip>
Going on the "by Military police" bit I'm guessing you doubt this. From what I've heard, the evidence is also the kit the solidiers in the photo where using and the type of vehicle in which photos were take were both incorrect -- not they stuff that was shipped to Iraq. This where some of the initial, fairly obvious (to those in the know... which *doesn't* include me btw!), errors. From this they've found the actual vehicle used... which I must admit to being suprised they could do... but given that all this evidence has been independantly corroborated *AND* the Mirror has agreed with it, I think we can be sure that *the photos WERE fake*!
So instead of it being soldiers engaged in acts that have been reported to the government already, it is solders faking sick and degrading behaviour and passing these off as real to a newspaper. Either because they are mentally disturbed psychotics who get a kick out that sort of behaviour or in an attempt to set up the newspaper.
Or perhaps because the paper *paid* for the photos? Maybe? Or perhaps there was political motivation? (I haven't heard this mentioned... yet... but it is another possibility)
Now call me picky, but one is confirmation that the army has some sick and twisted soldiers while the other is confirmation that the army has some sick and twisted soldiers.
LOL.. point taken, although *aledgedly* it might've perhaps been TA's who staged the pictures. Aledgedely. You might argue that they're essentially the same... but I suspect that a full time Soldier might disagree!
The only difference is that the mirror has paid for its opposition to the war by being set up - in either event it shows that there is something fundamentally broken in the discipline and behaviour of British soldiers.
In the case of the Mirror, thats the way these things go. It isn't the first time and it isn't the last, and although I detest Piers Morgan, he has simply screwed up. Largely, he's been unlucky, but it all goes with the territory; when this kind of stuff up happens, someone has to go. But on the plus side, *everyone* hates him, so no problems there!!
As for this bit about "something fundamentally broken in the discipline and behaviour of British solidiers", I think you're way out of line there. In any organisation there *are* going to be bad apples and you know there's some horrible shit going on over there. But this "news" report blatantly smeared the good name of the British solidiers and it was compeltely wrong to do that and has put lives at risk. There fact that "this is the type of thing that might also be going on" is besides the point... it implied that this kind of behaviour was rife, when it clearly isn't (even the reports of abuses that do exist do make this point).
The Mirror "report" was fundamentally flawed news reporting, and had very serious repercusions. Reporting on actual events is fine, but the Mirror report didn't do that. It used made up, false information.
Oh please... (Score:1, Insightful)
Explanation of joke for Non-Brits (Score:2, Informative)
I used to have some respect for the guy, but fuck him now-he's dragged his paper's reputation through the mud and he's making a bad name for everybody who was every against this war. If you're in the UK
Re:Explanation of joke for Non-Brits (Score:2)
The Mirror newspaper will struggle to regain it's credibility after this. (not that it has much to start with, IMHO)
Re:Explanation of joke for Non-Brits (Score:1)
Re:Explanation of joke for Non-Brits (Score:2, Insightful)
This is a serious blow for the truth in the UK. These pictures depicted an event that happened, they were reconstructions, not fakes.
You do realise that it was old news when the pictures were published? The story had already been run in all the papers (including the Mirror) several months earlier, and there was already an investigation into the allegations (which is still on-going).
The only re
Re:Explanation of joke for Non-Brits (Score:3, Informative)
He only started saying it that way toward the end of this week. Up until then, he was adamant they were authentic.
Also, the claims in the paper have brought forward the Red Cross report on prisoner abuse, that Blair and his cabinet claim they never got
Now you see, good journalism would have been if Morgan had made *that* his front page story rather than the picture
Well, now... (Score:1, Offtopic)
Misleading post? (Score:5, Interesting)
My understanding is that the *Universities of Kent and Lancaster* are no longer providing a mirroring service. There will be some sort of mirroring service provided to JANET users by a different third party. I think there was a tendering process and JANET decided to go with someone else this year.
However, I'm not sure that it's clear whether the new mirror will:
The last point is the real sticking issue. Can anyone else clarify things? Either way mirror.ac.uk (as it is currently) will be sorely missed. It's provided an extremely useful service over the years and I'm sure it's saved Swansea Uni a lot of transatlantic traffic over the years :)
Re:Misleading post? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a shame that they couldn't have been a little more organised in order to change providers seamlessly. It seems that the only people who _don't_ have access to the current mirror are going to be the new mirror providers!
Re:Misleading post? (Score:1)
According to the mirror.ac.uk announcement, they'll delete sites before the 1st August by their request.
We are, however, in the process of informing source sites of the end of contract and will, at their request, discontinue and delete mirrors prior to this date. [emphasis my own]
Where'd you get that bit of info from?
Re:Misleading post? (Score:1, Insightful)
The library service should be mirroring both software and media, there was talk of been legally required to archive websites with the library. How I'm supposed to archive my custom database driven dynamic website (realised in C) is beyond me but I would be happy to let them host all my bandwidth draining content.
It seems only fair to me (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It seems only fair to me (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because they don't survive on donations, does that make it bad?
They may sell a product, but what is mirrored is not something they make money on. They are giving their ISOs away for free, and what they are giving away is benefitial to the public.
It's pretty much the same for OpenOffice... Should it not be mirrored just because it is headed by Sun?
Re:It seems only fair to me (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It seems only fair to me (Score:2, Interesting)
Really? I thought most universities don't pay such charges. For example the place where I'm from has country-wide academic network that's connected to major ISPs via peering agreements so it doesn't have to pay any traffic charges.
Re:It seems only fair to me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It seems only fair to me (Score:1, Interesting)
Usage levels are still monitored, and I found an administrative error in that data which, had the old charging metric been in place, could have led to a serious financial screw-up. That's why I know the charging isn't used any more, they ment
Re:It seems only fair to me (Score:2)
Find a use for mydoom-infected machines? (Score:5, Interesting)
It'd be illegal but it has a certain karmic appeal.
Re:Find a use for mydoom-infected machines? (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have a million FTP servers, all sharing the same files, even if somebody wants the files, they aren't going to be able to scan every FTP server on every IP address.
If you use a Gnutella-style system, each node could have a different set of files, and it would be quite easy to find them. It wouldn't be illegial for somebody to have file downloadable via a Gnutella URN, but listing compromized hosts would show that the owners o
Re:Find a use for mydoom-infected machines? (Score:2)
Re:Find a use for mydoom-infected machines? (Score:2)
Site's getting slow... (Score:5, Funny)
Freecache, Mirror services (Score:5, Interesting)
Beside the universities large IP network operators should have mirrors at least for their own customers as this would reduce their bandwith.
See also at the /. article about freecache [slashdot.org], an project from archive.org
Re:Freecache, Mirror services (Score:1)
I think the sheer amount of projects and their sizes presents a lot of the problem. At my university I've been given a lot of old hardware to create our internal mirror. 500GB goes fast when you get all of Debian or Fedora. I have to constantly evaluate what is important, since I don't have the funds to throw more storage at the box.
If I could just get my hands on our
Will someone tell the uk government (Score:5, Funny)
Damn them! (Score:2)
Sad news (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sad news (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Sad news (Score:1)
new mirror (Score:1)
Obligatory Rocky Horror Joke... (Score:4, Funny)
sunsite.org.uk (Score:5, Informative)
Now a new server (as of this year) with kind thanks to [well earned plugs]:
Sun Microsystems - hardware
Thus (Demon) - Network feed
Veritas - Software
Brocade - Hardware
for their contunuing sponsorship.
and of course, the Department of Computing, Imperial College London for
housing and feeding it.
Currently it has 1.8 TB of publicly accessible mirrors and supports the following access mechanisms:
http://www.sunsite.org.uk/ [See here for full details]
ftp://ftp.sunsite.org.uk/
rsync://rsyn
Re:sunsite.org.uk (Score:1)
What would be sensible is for the JISC to give Imperial some money to help towards it's support, and re-direct the mirror.ac.uk URL towards it, it'd be well worth it for all...
R
Re:sunsite.org.uk (Score:1)
Why? Surely it must be on JANET too??
Re:sunsite.org.uk (Score:2)
over Demon's network - so if you are in the halls that are supplied by whichever telco has the contract (I forget)
you are probably going to take the circuitous route.
If you are within DoC's network then you will get the short route.
If you are anywhere else in Imperial - I'm not sure. Hopefully the short route but I cannot say that with certainty.
Re:sunsite.org.uk (Score:1)
I believe the only place you can currently get fast connectivity to Sunsite is within the DoC network. I've used the mirror outside the DoC but within college, and have had disappointing performance (vs mirror.ac.uk, for example). I understand that the current bandwidth situation will be improved soon, though. Also, I would hope that ICT and the DoC can sort out their routing, it really shouldn't be dificult at all to make Sunsite internally accessible to college.
At least Sunsite is back, though. I reme
Re:sunsite.org.uk (Score:2)
Re:sunsite.org.uk (Score:2)
I don't run Sunsite - but I work with the people who do. The answer is no - not at the present time.
SMB used to exist on the previous version - this isn't supported at present either. (We're now on Sunsite 3).
If its fast and reliable (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:If its fast and reliable (Score:1)
funding (Score:5, Insightful)
This sort of funding should come from the people that it's relevant for: i.e. the owners of intercontinential links, or it should be cooperatively funded, say to be co-located at a large interconnect -- as these people wear the costs of non-mirrors.
It's not relevant for the academic community to fund these things: doing so is a historical throwback to when the networks were largely academic, and most of the users were too. That's not how it is now, and personally I'd rather see the money used to support academic concerns, not a service increasingly used by non-academic.
I think if anyone is upset about this: direct complaints to people that should be doing something about it (i.e. exchanges/interconnects, international link providers).
Re:funding (Score:1)
I didn't mean to preclude anyone setting up a mirror for internal use, i.e. available only to JANET users, where it's justified.
But to support a general UK wide mirror that also chews up incoming JANET bandwidth, I don't think that's a good spend of money and effort.
> Why should they fund it? They get paid more if people have to use their links more.
I mean the
Re:funding (Score:1)
and who benefits from mirror.ac.uk (apart from
in other words, it's wholly appropriate that JISC run a publicly available mirror service. myself - sad to see the current service go, but without seeing the replacement (apart from the press releases) there's not much more to say.
In Other News... (Score:4, Funny)
shame but kernel.org was always late anyway (Score:1)
Maybe it's Freecache? (Score:2)
JISC has announced the replacement provider (Score:4, Informative)
The most interesting bit of the blurb is:
Having said that, I'm somewhat sceptical awarding the contract based on cost won't lead to a degradation of service. Whatever happened to "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"?
Let us Americans** contribute to it! (Score:2)
**For the masses who are as ignorant of American culture as many Americans are of much of the rest of the world, Yank/Yankee/Yanqui and American are not interchangeable. If you are ever below the Mason-Dixon line in America, do not call anyone a Yankee unless they have a New England accent. (This me
Re:Let us Americans** contribute to it! (Score:1)
No acedemic stuff? (Score:2)
So I can keep using gigabytes of bandwidth running "emerge sync && emerge -uD world" every day, but I can't get at some research PDFs? Are they really saying that?
Times move on (Score:2)
Unusual language (Score:1)
Ah, this is obviously some strange new usage of the words "fast" and "reliable", which is not in normal language.
OK, I'll admit that mirror.ac.uk is always up, but in multiple attempts to get gzipped isos from it, I've never (repeat : "never") once got better than 28kbyte/s from it, when my line is capable of about 50kbyte/s. And I've only had about 1 iso in 20 download success
Re:Unusual language (Score:1)
they have computers in the U.K.? (Score:2)
Re:haven't you learned ANYTHING at all from the pa (Score:1)