On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 at 22:25, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 4:37 PM Roberto Ragusa
> On 1/8/19 4:22 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > If all you want to do is count, then it should be entirely sufficient
> > to do it like this:
> > GET
> > the first time within each one-week window and a simple
> > GET /metalink?repo=fedora-28&arch=x86_64&edition=<blah>
> > all other times.
> As an additional improvement, is it really needed to count every machine?
> We can subsample a lot, and only let some specific machines to show
> up for counting.
The difficulty is not the counting. Requiring safe counting and
aggregation by the server is a requirement that no server or
intermediate server or proxy needs to follow, and would require
configuration or filtering control of a server that is outside of
client hands. It's not legally or technologically mandated. The great
use fo r the data is tracking hosts, metadata that is saleable and
likely to help provide a new form of tracking information.
Writing this into the dnf behavior is typical, but i't's not
beneficial to the clients. It's beneficial to the mirrors, who are
likely to sell the data. While it may be that infamous problem, a
"Simple Matter Of Programming(tm)" to sanitize the data, there are
strong motivations to collect it and sell it, and I'd expect various
mirrors to start doing so within moments of the activation of the
1. The mirrors do not see this.
2. We aren't talking about UUIDs anymore and just a countme variable being
sent periodically. If a countme is going to be too much data to send, then
clients are probably already sending way too much data already.
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Stephen J Smoogen.