Mike,

I will forward to the requisite group for a look. Have you brought this to our 
attention previously? I don't see anything. If you did, please forward me the 
ticket numbers or message(s) (peering@ is best) so wee can track down and see 
if someone already has it in queue.

Jared alluded to fasttcp a few emails ago. Astute man.

Best,

Martin Hannigan 
AS 20940 // AS 32787



> On Sep 21, 2016, at 14:30, Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote:
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Jdm0dOBf81kSnXEvVfI6ZJbWFNt5AbYUV8CDxGwLSm8/edit?usp=sharing
>  
> 
> I have made the anonymized answers public. This will obviously have some bias 
> to it given that I mostly know fixed wireless operators, but I'm hoping this 
> gets some good distribution to catch more platforms. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> From: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> 
> To: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 9:08:55 AM 
> Subject: Re: CDN Overload? 
> 
> https://goo.gl/forms/LvgFRsMdNdI8E9HF3 
> 
> I have made this into a Google Form to make it easier to track compared to 
> randomly formatted responses on multiple mailing lists, Facebook Groups, etc. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> 
> From: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> 
> To: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> 
> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 12:34:48 PM 
> Subject: CDN Overload? 
> 
> 
> I participate on a few other mailing lists focused on eyeball networks. For a 
> couple years I've been hearing complaints from this CDN or that CDN was 
> behaving badly. It's been severely ramping up the past few months. There have 
> been some wild allegations, but I would like to develop a bit more 
> standardized evidence collection. Initially LimeLight was the only culprit, 
> but recently it has been Microsoft as well. I'm not sure if there have been 
> any others. 
> 
> The principal complaint is that upstream of whatever is doing the rate 
> limiting for a given customer there is significantly more capacity being 
> utilized than the customer has purchased. This could happen briefly as TCP 
> adjusts to the capacity limitation, but in some situations this has persisted 
> for days at a time. I'll list out a few situations as best as I can recall 
> them. Some of these may even be merges of a couple situations. The point is 
> to show the general issue and develop a better process for collecting what 
> exactly is happening at the time and how to address it. 
> 
> One situation had approximately 45 megabit/s of capacity being used up by a 
> customer that had a 1.5 megabit/s plan. All other traffic normally held 
> itself within the 1.5 megabit/s, but this particular CDN sent excessively 
> more for extended periods of time. 
> 
> An often occurrence has someone with a single digit megabit/s limitation 
> consuming 2x - 3x more than their plan on the other side of the rate limiter. 
> 
> Last month on my own network I saw someone with 2x - 3x being consumed 
> upstream and they had *190* connections downloading said data from Microsoft. 
> 
> The past week or two I've been hearing of people only having a single 
> connection downloading at more than their plan rate. 
> 
> 
> These situations effectively shut out all other Internet traffic to that 
> customer or even portion of the network for low capacity NLOS areas. It's a 
> DoS caused by downloads. What happened to the days of MS BITS and you didn't 
> even notice the download happening? A lot of these guys think that the CDNs 
> are just a pile of dicks looking to ruin everyone's day and I'm certain that 
> there are at least a couple people at each CDN that aren't that way. ;-) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of rambling, sure. What do I need to have these guys collect as evidence 
> of a problem and who should they send it to? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to