[SAM] [www.ietf.org/rt #50961] The IETF rsync server is down again

"Glen via RT" <ietf-action@ietf.org> Wed, 26 September 2012 19:22 UTC

From: Glen via RT <ietf-action@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <rt-3.6.5-21330-1348680606-1274.50961-7-0@www.ietf.org/rt>
References: <RT-Ticket-50961@www.ietf.org/rt> <34E66D8E-3849-4260-BDB7-1A5D7813F3E2@vpnc.org> <rt-3.6.5-19112-1348676806-713.50961-6-0@www.ietf.org/rt> <1A0FA67E-5A04-4A87-81F2-1EA0DD29B1E3@vpnc.org> <rt-3.6.5-9790-1348677577-1953.50961-6-0@www.ietf.org/rt> <rt-3.6.5-30703-1348678984-1201.50961-6-0@www.ietf.org/rt> <DF1D0E93-4767-4AC0-9119-8FFC3328F398@vpnc.org> <rt-3.6.5-21330-1348680606-1274.50961-7-0@www.ietf.org/rt>
Message-ID: <rt-3.6.5-15895-1348687367-1482.50961-7-0@www.ietf.org/rt>
Precedence: bulk
RT-Ticket: www.ietf.org/rt #50961
Managed-by: RT 3.6.5 (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/)
RT-Originator: glen@amsl.com
To: "OtherRecipients of www.ietf.org/rt Ticket #50961":;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:22:58 -0700
Subject: [SAM] [www.ietf.org/rt #50961] The IETF rsync server is down again
Reply-To: ietf-action@ietf.org

On Wed Sep 26 10:30:06 2012, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org wrote:
> Yeah, that makes sense for a box that has multiple services on it.
>    However, it means that you (in the future) need to monitor when the
>    limit is being hit for, say, more than an hour. And then do
>    something about it, which is harder.

Yes, I totally agree.  I'm building a comprehensive monitoring system
for stuff like this for AMS, and the IETF, so your point is well-taken
and we will definitely be adding something like this in shortly.

> Glad I only do ops as a hobby...

Ahh, I dream of such luxury!

Best regards,
Glen

[SAM] [www.ietf.org/rt #50961] The IETF rsync ser… Glen via RT
[SAM] [www.ietf.org/rt #50961] The IETF rsync ser… Glen via RT