Per-Entity Metadata Working Group

[Nicholas Roy <>]

On 8/12/16 3:59 PM, Tom Scavo wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 12:02 PM, IJ Kim 
> <>
>  wrote:
>> It occurs to me that running multiple mdq metadata providers wouldn't be
>> too hard while I'm not sure if clients can chain them or can consume a
>> second mdq provider with something like "backingMDQUrl".  Achieving five
>> 9s among these providers would be much feasible.
> This is a great idea. Ops might run a single, primary HA MDQ server on
> the CDN of choice and then look to the community to add one or more
> backup servers to the pool. Deployers could rely on the primary alone
> or configure a chain of primary and secondary servers, where the
> secondary is chosen from one of the servers in the pool.
>
> Tom
+1 to this being a great idea.  This might also be the way that we gain
the diversity of CDNs we may end up thinking we need - one addition to
the chain per CDN that ops might run.

-- 
Nick

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature