On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 08:56:10AM -0700, Chris Knight said: > On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 6:36 AM, Stephen Gran <st...@lobefin.net> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 05:02:07PM -0700, Chris Knight said: > >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Christopher X. Candreva > >> <ch...@westnet.com> wrote: > >> > On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Simon Hobson wrote: > >> > > >> >> So, it still runs the software it used to run ? Yes > >> >> It's running software that is EOL ? Most definitely > >> >> And Microsoft have sent it a poison pill ? No they haven't > >> > > >> > And is it hitting Microsoft's servers for full updates even when it > >> > should > >> > only be downloading little pieces, or nothing at all ? > >> > >> 1) Release a new version that pulls updates from a new hostname. > > > > You mean, deploy a parallel infrastructure of vhosting, monitoring, > > pushing updates, etc? When most of the mirrors are on third party > > servers not under the control of the clamav team? Do you really think > > that's trivial, or were you just making up a solution without knowing > > anything about the problem? > > I wasn't going to reply any more in this thread, but since you don't > seem to know anything about server hosting, and I don't seem to know > anything about 'the problem', then we might as well clash some more. > > You don't have to build a parallel infrastructure. You use the same > infrastructure. You add (|a) new DNS entr(y|ies) that point(|s) to > the same server infrastructure. You reference the new DNS entr(y|ies) > in the new client builds. Then, on a specific day, you remove the old > entries. Presto, all the old client traffic goes away. It's not > rocket science.
Sigh. I guess you didn't bother to read the part about "third party servers not under the control of the clamav team". This means updating the actual edge servers is not trivial. The 'parallel infrastructure' wasn't referring to deploying new hardware, it was referring to getting all the same monitoring, syncing, deploying, serving, etc working with the new name. This is fine, although slightly non-trivial given the number of machines, even when you are the sole admins. When you're relying on third parties donating bandwidth and space on 100s of shared servers, it's less approachable. But anyway, I think this is end of thread for me. If you really think that the clamav team's time is best spent chasing up hundreds of local admins to make changes to their rsync/webserver/etc vhost configs, then deploying and testing all the changes necessary to make this work, instead of working on clamav just to save a few admins a small amount of work that they should have been doing anyway, you're welcome to your opinion, and I won't bother you with mine any more. I just disagree. Cheers, -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Stephen Gran | Q: How do you keep a moron in suspense? | | st...@lobefin.net | | | http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
