Problem (again) with portsnap5.FreeBSD.org?

[Guido Falsi]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 01:02:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 09:53:24PM +0200, Barbara wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 01:11:35 +0200 (CEST)
> > > Barbara <barbara.xxx1975 at libero.it> articulated:
> > > 
> > >> $ date
> > >> Wed Oct 20 01:11:10 CEST 2010
> > >> 
> > >> # portsnap fetch update
> > >> Looking up portsnap.FreeBSD.org mirrors... 5 mirrors found.
> > >> Fetching snapshot tag from portsnap5.FreeBSD.org... failed.
> > >> Fetching snapshot tag from portsnap6.FreeBSD.org... done.
> > > 
> > > From time to time, "portsnap' does that. It usually remedies itself
> > > within 24 hours. Other than being a potential superficial annoyance, I
> > > doubt that it causes any serious harm. I have noticed that #5 seems to
> > > be the most troublesome server however.
> > 
> > My only intention was to report that and not complaining about the annoyance.
> > I just wanted to alter people maintaining #5.
> > If it's "expected", no problem.
> 
> I think freebsd-hubs@ is the list where most of the cvsup and portsnap
> mirror/owners live.  I'd consider posting concerns there.

I have a related question.

I have noticed on the machines I use/administer a bias towards
portsnap5.

I mean, all these machines are always choosing mirror number five.

Some are behind squid proxies and using them for portsnap, so I think this can
be expected and caused in some way by some cached data, but some are
connecting directly.

Is this in some way expected?

My portsnap.conf file is th stock one.

Could this also due to DNS cacheing?

Thank you for any information, and excuse me if my question is plain
stupid :D

-- 
Guido Falsi <mad at madpilot.net>