3 ms·

What a trollish headline. Yeah, I'm sure the guys who just threw an object the size of a minivan 350 million miles through space and hit a target the size of th

What a trollish headline. Yeah, I'm sure the guys who just threw an object the size of a minivan 350 million miles through space and hit a target the size of the parking lot in front of 7-11 can't figure out bind. I'm guessing there's lots of Apis from the wayback that are URL dependent and diverting just web through all that madness over to the www servers isn't a cakewalk.

zzzeek 14y ago
but that's not what the article says. it says: > Setting up our infrastructure to do that is technically straightforward: we need to add more servers to handle a lot of additional traffic on the front end, before people get to content. as a description of the problem, the above seems kind of nonsensical. Which suggests that even this blogger is in fact, guessing, and then worse just passing it off as an explanation, and then we're back to NASA looking kind of bad here.
- px1999 14y ago
  My best guess is that they're trying to say that whatever www runs off looks at the host header, and that they'd need to do some additional work in either 301ing requests, or set up a reverse proxy. In either of these cases, yeah, the headline is a little sensationalist. Based off the wording, it sounds like they're responding to "why can't I browse http://nasa.gov/x http://nasa.gov/x without the www?" rather than "why doesn't http://nasa.gov/x http://nasa.gov/x take me to the NASA website?", but as they're a government agency, it's quite possible that there's so much bureaucracy / cost involved that it legitimately isn't even worth it to add a url-redirect server somewhere.
Nogwater 14y ago
I'm pretty sure the MSL team is a different team than the ones managing the DNS servers, and expertise in one area doesn't transfer to another automatically. Maybe they do have some reason why it would be difficult to add a CNAME, maybe not.
- soult 14y ago
  The reason why it would be difficult to add a CNAME is simple: They need NS records for nasa.gov, and a CNAME record precludes any other records for the same name.
zzzeek 14y ago
also, I apologize. I should have said, "hosting configuration". I can't edit the headline now. I would rather delete it than leave it as is.

zzzeek 14y ago

but that's not what the article says. it says: > Setting up our infrastructure to do that is technically straightforward: we need to add more servers to handle a lot of additional traffic on the front end, before people get to content. as a description of the problem, the above seems kind of nonsensical. Which suggests that even this blogger is in fact, guessing, and then worse just passing it off as an explanation, and then we're back to NASA looking kind of bad here.

px1999 14y ago
My best guess is that they're trying to say that whatever www runs off looks at the host header, and that they'd need to do some additional work in either 301ing requests, or set up a reverse proxy. In either of these cases, yeah, the headline is a little sensationalist. Based off the wording, it sounds like they're responding to "why can't I browse http://nasa.gov/x http://nasa.gov/x without the www?" rather than "why doesn't http://nasa.gov/x http://nasa.gov/x take me to the NASA website?", but as they're a government agency, it's quite possible that there's so much bureaucracy / cost involved that it legitimately isn't even worth it to add a url-redirect server somewhere.

Nogwater 14y ago

I'm pretty sure the MSL team is a different team than the ones managing the DNS servers, and expertise in one area doesn't transfer to another automatically. Maybe they do have some reason why it would be difficult to add a CNAME, maybe not.

soult 14y ago
The reason why it would be difficult to add a CNAME is simple: They need NS records for nasa.gov, and a CNAME record precludes any other records for the same name.

zzzeek 14y ago

also, I apologize. I should have said, "hosting configuration". I can't edit the headline now. I would rather delete it than leave it as is.