Re: Unable to add HTTP url to mirror host in mirrormanager

[Adrian Reber]

On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 04:02:02PM -0500, Samuel Patwin wrote:
>  Hi Folks. My colleagues and I are doing some spring cleaning with our
> Mirror
>  servers(mirror.rackspace.com) and I've noticed some self-inflicted decay
>  with regards to our information as stored on the Fedora project so I'm
>  working to get our mirrors properly set up in Mirror Manager and am running
>  into some issues.
>  
>  Firstly while I can add the https and rsync URLs to a host, I am unable to
>  get our http url added to a host with a "Could not add Category URL to the
>  host" error, likely because the url is already added to another host
>  somewhere within MirrorManager. Looking through the mailing list archive it
>  looks like my predecessors on-boarded our Mirrors using an FAS account
>  "rackspace" which is now marked inactive(uses a dead email box). I'd like
> to
>  get the URL freed up so I can add it to a Host that is on a Site tied to my
>  team's active FAS accounts. 
I deleted the old Site and Host with the HTTP URL which was owned by
the 'rackspace' account.

>  Additionally I'd like to find a way to properly have our mirrors
> added to
>  the network while still taking advantage the "globally available" nature of
>  our infrastructure. Our DNS entries are load balanced via F5 GTM load
>  balancers such that we use the same fqdn for our mirrors globally, but
>  caching nameservers pull different entries depending on their
>  latency/region. The problem is that we aren't able to add the same URL to
>  multiple hosts as can be seen with my first issue. What I'd like to see is
>  the ability for a single "Site" to have multiple hosts defined that are able
>  to re-use the same URL in the case that global server load balancing via DNS
>  is being used, possibly only with fedora admin approval and/or unique ASNs
>  are used. If a better place for this second request is a feature request via
>  github please just let me know and I'll be happy to file it. 
The correct place for a discussion like this would be github, indeed. I
understand why you want something like that, but the chances for this
being implemented are pretty low, as the URL currently is defined as a
unique value in the database and as our whole mirror decision process
kind of relies on the fact that it is unique. It sounds pretty
disruptive but let's discuss it on github.

		Adrian