[Bug 699509] Support NetworkManager connectivity checking

["sysadmin" (bugzilla.gnome.org) <bugzilla gnome org>]

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=699509
  sysadmin | Other | unspecified

--- Comment #7 from Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com> 2013-05-03 13:26:05 UTC ---
I think there are all sorts of external things that we could use from different
vendors out on the internet, and most are going to provide better performance
and reliability than anything we host on gnome.org. But it's not performance
and reliability that we can rely on as a project. That especially refers to
anything hosted by Apple/Microsoft/Google/etc - companies that have no
relationship to our software.

I don't see any real issue with handling tens of millions of requests a day if:

 - We don't share the web server processes with anything dynamic
 - We don't log the requests

At that point, probably the web server isn't the bottleneck compared to the
network card - but you could further hyper-optimize it arbitrarily.

[ That being said - if we have someone shipping millions of copies of
NetworkManager it would be nice if they would reconfigure NM not to use our
service - especially if there's a 120s ping frequency (is that necessary to
make it that fast?) or provide resources to handle the service. ]

While we may be somewhat limited at what we can configure now by an IP address
shortage and not wanting to get complex, to make sure that we have the
flexiblity to do whatever we want in the future, having a separate domain name
seems like a good idea.

Even if we have a separate domain name, I'd suggest using an URL that isn't / -
that is, say http://nmcheck.gnome.org/check_network_status.html - so that we
can do:

 nmcheck CNAME www.sponsoring-company-with-cool-multihomed-network.com.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching the QA contact of the bug.
You are watching the assignee of the bug.