Alternate Mozilla 0.9.9 Download Locations
Friday March 15th, 2002
Mitchell Baker writes: "Mozilla.org has logged approximately 150,000 downloads of the 0.9.9 Milestone in its first 48 hours on the wire. Interest in 0.9.9 has been so great that we overwhelmed the 100 Mbit full duplex link from ftp.mozilla.org with heavy traffic." Because of this, mozilla.org and Netscape have set up a new set of servers (http, ftp) to handle the load. Also, you can check the mirrors list for servers closer to you.
#1 the http link doesn't work (nt)
Friday March 15th, 2002 11:16 PM
i said no text =)
#2 Re: the http link doesn't work (nt)
Friday March 15th, 2002 11:17 PM
whoah that was weird ... i was getting a 404 and i just went back and it loads fine ... weird
by TonyG <email@example.com.Yuk>
Saturday March 16th, 2002 4:05 AM
This site is well out of date.
#4 Re: ftp://sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk/Mirrors/ftp.mozilla
Saturday March 16th, 2002 5:02 AM
I heard something from a guy at imperial college who was doing a presentation at the UKUUG winter conference that sunsite UK isn't staying upto date anymore.
I stopped using Imperial College's mirror site quite a while ago - <ftp://ftp.mirror.ac.uk> is now the de facto UK mirror site (not just for Mozilla/Netscape) as far as I'm concerned. Strange, though, how the ".uk" section of the mirrors list has <ftp://ftp.mirror.ac.uk> down *twice* (albeit one path slightly deeper than the other) ! Shume mishtake shurely ? :-)
#6 0.9.9 is getting a lot of good publicity
Saturday March 16th, 2002 7:12 AM
and people are having faith that 1.0 will be a substantial fraction of what it's cracked up to be.
I wonder what Netscape will do for servers when 1.0 is released ... What was the server load like when 6.1 and 6.2 were released?
How about something like what jwz describes <http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nscpdorm.html> was done when Netscape 0.9 beta was released. Perhaps not cannon shots: perhaps the sound of a handclap for each successful download. Applause!
#8 Re: 0.9.9 is getting a lot of good publicity
by kotalampi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Saturday March 16th, 2002 2:47 PM
The new site, download.mozilla.org, is very scalable architecture. Right now it's distributed over 8 systems. Same systems host AOL/ICQ/Spinner/Netscape downloads and shouldn't have problems even with mozilla 1.0 volume.
#11 Re: 0.9.9 is getting a lot of good publicity
Saturday March 16th, 2002 4:48 PM
Dunno what the load was, but I think Netscape has at least 30 or so download servers, and I think we're randomly sent to one of them whenever we go to <ftp://ftp.netscape.com.>
#12 Re: Re: 0.9.9 is getting a lot of good publicity
Saturday March 16th, 2002 9:46 PM
you're not randomly sent to anything. When you go to <ftp://ftp.mozilla.org> you are going to a server called komodo.
He did write about <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> and not .mozilla.org, is this the same server?
#16 Re: ftp.mozilla.org?
Sunday March 17th, 2002 9:47 AM
ah, yes. you are correct.
<ftp://ftp.NETSCAPE.com> used to be load balanced via simple RoundRobin DNS and there were other DNS entries for things like 'ftp22.netscape.com' whose IP would still be part of the round robin... it would appear to still be the case: # host <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 22.214.171.124 <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 126.96.36.199 <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 188.8.131.52 <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 184.108.40.206 <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 220.127.116.11 <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 18.104.22.168 <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 22.214.171.124 <ftp://ftp.netscape.com> has address 126.96.36.199
#18 Re: 0.9.9 is getting a lot of good publicity
by johnlar <email@example.com>
Sunday March 17th, 2002 11:31 AM
You know what would suck, if someone wrote an article concerning the history of mozilla and read that and thought there was a 8 year gap between mozilla 0.9 and 0.9.9 that would suck :)
Is content pushed to them, or do they pull from the official site?
Would it be possible to make sure that 1.0 is distributed to all mirros, before the release annoncement is sent to the masses?
How about advertising more heavily for the mirror sites?
#17 Re: How do mirror sites work?
by gerbilpower <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sunday March 17th, 2002 10:41 AM
Mirrors contains copies of the content. Their purpose is to relieve traffic from the official source, so merely "pushing" or "pulling" from the official site does nothing to make the server's bandwidth job easier.
Whether or not the mirrors get the 1.0 release prior to the announcement and how well they are advertised is up to the people of mozilla.org (and Netscape for their resources) making the finishing touches on it.
Huh? I'm not sure what this means.
Of course distributing up-to-date stuff to the mirror sites will make things easier on the master. If the mirrors are out of date, nobody is going to use them and the master will be slammed. If you're just saying the specifics of the mirroring mechanism doesn't matter, obviously that's true.
The key here is getting them updated before somebody submits the release announcement to Slashdot, which is rapidly becoming an unofficial freshmeat.net mirror itself.
Is it no longer being updated?
I would imagine that Asa's (I think he updates buildbar) been busy recently.
#13 Re: Buildbar???
Saturday March 16th, 2002 9:53 PM
I'll try to get back to it. I've been really busy lately. In the mean time you can find great comments on daily builds at the BuildBar Forum <http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback/list.php?f=4>
150,000 downloads is quite impressive. Does anyone have any information about how many downloads per platform?
#23 Re: Platform breakdown?
Monday March 18th, 2002 7:50 PM
After the first few days it was about 50% windows, 32% linux and 14% mac (with the other 3 or 4% mostly solaris and OS/2). This was with the not so great sample of only a few days (150K downloads) and it's possible that one of the platforms got higher visibility after that (slashdot notice seems to push the linux and windows downloads while versiontracker helps the mac numbers). I can get some better numbers soon. I expect to see a slightly higher Mac percentage if the trend of the last few Milestones holds.
I have been following Mozilla for a while now, and am well chuffed with the amount of work being put into this excellent browser.
This is another triumph for the opensource community - as long as there is a source of advocacy for it (some site that lays the smack down - what the latest version of Mozilla supports, plain and simple). It would be nice to compare, standard for standard, Mozilla's abilities to Internet Exploder 6's abilities.
Well done Mozilla developers!
#24 Re: Brilliant Stuff
Monday March 18th, 2002 7:58 PM
"It would be nice to compare, standard for standard, Mozilla's abilities to Internet Exploder 6's abilities. "
For CSS, you can see for yourself. <http://www.bath.ac.uk/%7Epy8ieh/cgi/listresults.pl>