Seems like they (MS) should look into promoting a multicast network for
distributing updates.
Or simply limit automatic background updates to 256k (per destination).
If the user clicked the update button, sure get it to run as fast as
possible, but if it's in the background and they don't even know it's
happening then it ought to not matter how long the download takes.
...of course MS is not likely to care about my opinion on the matter.
------ Original Message ------
From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 7/14/2016 2:33:21 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CDN overload
I forgot about this. Yes. A little later in the day, I started to see a
lot of 13.n.n.n sources. Microsoft. Yeah, update Tuesday. Then the same
customer would start receiving from LLNW. Then Akamai. And back to MS
again. So it looks like they're *still* distributing updates across
various CDNs. And believe me, it's not like they were all hitting this
customer at once. One single CDN would try to send at 5-10X the
customer's downlink MIR. Sometimes more. At one point I saw over 20Mbps
for 5-10 minutes. I saw pretty much the same thing with about 15 other
customers that I looked at. And they were spread across 5-6 towers.
Some directly licensed fed, others farther towards the edge.
DDoS. CDN. Same thing. Or gorilla tactics at the very least. If the
customer calls and says "none of my other shit works, your internet
sucks" what are we supposed to do? Oh OK, here, we'll turn you up to
12Mbps and see what that does. Yeah screw that because now the CDN is
sending at 40Mbps! They need to stop fucking with TCP already! And no,
it doesn't matter where I put the policing/shaping. They still eat up
bandwidth on our upstreams. Like you said before Ken, yeah, it just
moves the problem somewhere else.
On 7/13/2016 11:39 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
George, did you identify the application or content provider, or only
the CDN?
I think I started getting hit with the same thing early yesterday
afternoon. At first I thought I was getting DDOS attacks.
From:George Skorup
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 6:21 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CDN overload
Yup. LLNW.
On 7/12/2016 5:35 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
I assume you torched the traffic and verified it is all coming from a
particular CDN, not a random bunch of IPs as would be the case with
BT. Since this isn’t your first rodeo.
From:George Skorup
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 5:31 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CDN overload
Because they dick with TCP.
On 7/12/2016 5:23 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
And why is it the fault of the CDN? It could be a customer with a
100-peer bittorrent session downloading 30GB of Ubuntu DVD ISOs.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 3:13 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]>
wrote:
I have had it with these CDNs sending more traffic than the last
mile can handle. Got a customer at 1.5Mbps on 900 FSK and they're
sending to her at 15Mbps. Of course the AP reports RF downlink
overloaded.
