I was thinking the same thing.  Especially since most larger CDN's (eg
Akamai) are killing SSLv3 at their edge already.  Even if a site accepts
SSLv3, only older browsers should actually use it (IE6).

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Ken Hohhof via Af <[email protected]> wrote:

>   I wonder if Procera lumps TLS together with SSLv3.  The stuff you see
> about POODLE leads you to believe only a small amount of legacy sites use
> SSLv3.
>
>  *From:* Kurt Fankhauser via Af <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 12, 2014 9:17 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] procera results
>
>  so if someone is logged into google and watched a youtube video it shows
> as SSL ?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> Wavelinc Communications
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> http://www.wavelinc.com
> tel. 419-562-6405
> fax. 419-617-0110
>
> On Nov 12, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Joe Falaschi via Af <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  That is one of my concerns with this solution.  Google already encrypts
> a fair amount of traffic.  I think if you're logged in to your google
> account it is encrypted and you can no longer identify it.  They also block
> search terms from being reported for SEO if the end user is logged in but
> that's another issue.  In any case a good portion of that SSL could be
> google video.  At the moment it's not a big deal but in the future it could
> be if others start doing the same thing.
>
> Joe Falaschi
> e-vergent.com, LLC.
>
> On 11/12/14, 7:43 AM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:
>
>  That’s a lot of SSLv3 considering the POODLE bug.
>
>  *From:* Brian Meredith via Af <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 12, 2014 1:14 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] procera results
>
>  Here's our inbound traffic for last month.
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:48 PM, Bill Prince via Af <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  That's a record in my book.  We have a new sub doing a 1/2 TB a week (2
>> TB per month), and that is a high for us.
>>
>> bp
>> <part-15@SkylineBroadbandService>
>>
>>
>>  On 11/11/2014 8:57 PM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:
>>
>>  Yeah, I have a new customer like that.  He was heading toward 3 TB/mo
>> usage and was complaining because he couldn’t stream Netflix and Youtube at
>> 1080p while maxing out his connection with 10 NNTPS connections.  I think
>> I’ve convinced him he needs to shut it off when he’s streaming.  Not sure
>> why he can’t schedule on and off times or limit the bandwidth.  I think
>> these people are video horders.  When you are downloading over 100 GB per
>> day, when will you watch it all?  Unless this is 4K quality.
>>
>>
>>  *From:* Mike Hammett via Af <[email protected]>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 11, 2014 10:41 PM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] procera results
>>
>>  Quality of torrents is an issue. That's why the serious guys have gone
>> back to UseNet. Automation is great.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From: *"That One Guy via Af" mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>
>> *To: *[email protected]
>> *Sent: *Tuesday, November 11, 2014 8:53:12 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] procera results
>>
>> when we audit through various means, we dont see much torrenting anymore,
>> I think its gone out of style with youngsters with pandora and the like
>> with cellular audio, less care about stored mp3, every video is available
>> in real time now, so why bother torrenting a movie you cant verify the
>> quality of beforehand
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Rory Conaway via Af <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>  This is amazing.  Thanks.  What’s interesting to me is how little
>>> bandwidth torrents are using.  I can put up 10 people and 2 of them are
>>> using torrents almost immediately.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rory
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser
>>> via Af
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 11, 2014 10:10 AM
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] procera results
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> i am not blocking/shaping anything right now, that bar graph is only
>>> showing the top 10 results right now
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kurt Fankhauser
>>>
>>> Wavelinc Communications
>>>
>>> P.O. Box 126
>>>
>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>>>
>>> http://www.wavelinc.com
>>>
>>> tel. 419-562-6405
>>>
>>> fax. 419-617-0110
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 11, 2014, at 10:34 AM, Rory Conaway via Af <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Kurt, are you blocking or shaping any torrents?  I don’t see that in
>>> your chart.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rory
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser via Af
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 11, 2014 8:23 AM
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] procera results
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Havn't shaped any traffic yet with this procera box. But here is a graph
>>> of what kind of traffic the clients are using as a whole in one days time.
>>> Of course Netflix is at top. But i am surprised at how close behind that
>>> youtube is (shows up as http media stream) Usually at any given time the
>>> Netflix/Youtube accounts for 50-75% of all traffic running through this box.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kurt Fankhauser
>>>
>>> Wavelinc Communications
>>>
>>> P.O. Box 126
>>>
>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>>>
>>> http://www.wavelinc.com
>>>
>>> tel. 419-562-6405
>>>
>>> fax. 419-617-0110
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>  All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that
>> the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
>> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not
>> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>  Regards,
>
> Brian Meredith
> Chief Technology Officer / Network Administrator
> Softcom Internet Communications, Inc.
> (209) 744-4234
>
>
>

Reply via email to