On most of the connections I've checked the traffic is coming from a
13.x.x.x IP (which is Microsoft), but some of them have been various CDN's
IP adresses as well... they all seem to be behaving the same though - lots
and lots of http connections to one IP.

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:45 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
[email protected]> wrote:

> that wouldnt be CDN traffic, lol unless there is a tech with a windows 10
> laptop connected at the CDN, that would be funny if thats what it boiled
> down to
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Everyone is aware (I hope) that M$ runs the Windows 10 updates like a
>> bittorrent? Default configuration is to "share" updates with all your
>> neighbors, both on your LAN, and on the internet. This includes the Windows
>> 10 upgrade, which is around 2 or 3 GB.
>>
>> You can turn off that behavior in the settings. Go to Settings->Update &
>> Security->Windows Update->Advanced Options->Choose how updates are
>> delivered.
>>
>> Then UNCHECK "PCs on my local network, and PCs on the Internet" (OR
>> rather) CHECK "PCs on my local network".
>>
>>
>> bp
>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>
>>
>> On 7/14/2016 5:50 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>>
>> 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 <[email protected]>
>> *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 <[email protected]>
>> *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.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team
> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>

Reply via email to