Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
Once upon a time, William Herrin said: > Ordinary ionization-based smoke detectors use a 10-year lithium > battery, which is about the same lifespan as the americium-based > detector circuit as it begins to decay into neptunium. Also, some detectors are wired to household 120VAC service, so the battery is a backup, not primary, power source. I think this is required in modern residential building codes. My house was built 30 years ago and has this. I think larger homes even connect all the detectors together (so one detector going off can trigger all to alarm). And for typical 9V replaceable battery models, the "change the battery twice a year" bit is not based on the actual load, but just trying to get people to think about it (and maybe then getting it changed once a year, which is perfectly fine and maybe even still more often than needed). -- Chris Adams
Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
This is because there is only enough undecayed Americium in the 10-YO smoke detectors to supply radioactive boyscouts with reactor fuel :) -mel > On Jan 13, 2021, at 11:49 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote: > > > On January 14, 2021 at 04:56 j...@baylink.com (Jay R. Ashworth) wrote: >> Well, it probably gets way worse: if it's a "permanent" battery, it will be >> harder to find, and harder to replace... > > No, you don't replace the permanent batteries in these 10 year smoke > detectors, you toss the whole smoke detector and buy a new one. Heroic > efforts aside. > > So you don't need to find the right battery. > > FWIW many smoke detectors bought in the past 10-15 years (I dunno but > something like that) even with typical replaceable batteries have some > sort of timer in them so when they hit 10 years they begin beeping in > a slightly different pattern (like two short beeps every 60 seconds) > and replacing the battery doesn't help. It just begins doing that on > the fresh battery until you figure out that you need to toss the > detector and buy a new one. > > Ran into that, looked it up on their web site as I was confused why a > new battery wasn't helping and they confirmed that means the detector > has expired buy a new one. > > I assume these 10 year sealed smoke detectors somehow came out of > that. > >> >> - Original Message - >>> From: "William Herrin" >>> To: "jra" >>> Cc: b...@theworld.com, nanog@nanog.org >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 11:52:47 PM >>> Subject: Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and >>> Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study) >> >>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 7:58 PM Jay R. Ashworth wrote: >>>> Last time I looked, consumer residential smoke detectors were still running >>>> off 9V alkaline batteries, which are expected to run the device for 6 >>>> months >>>> of 1/99 duty cycle (or less, probably *way* less). >>> >>> Ordinary ionization-based smoke detectors use a 10-year lithium >>> battery, which is about the same lifespan as the americium-based >>> detector circuit as it begins to decay into neptunium. >>> >>> You may now resume your argument over how much battery drain is too much. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Bill Herrin >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Hire me! https://bill.herrin.us/resume/ >> >> -- >> Jay R. Ashworth Baylink >> j...@baylink.com >> Designer The Things I Think RFC >> 2100 >> Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover >> DII >> St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 >> 1274 > > -- >-Barry Shein > > Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | > http://www.TheWorld.com > Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD > The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
On January 14, 2021 at 04:56 j...@baylink.com (Jay R. Ashworth) wrote: > Well, it probably gets way worse: if it's a "permanent" battery, it will be > harder to find, and harder to replace... No, you don't replace the permanent batteries in these 10 year smoke detectors, you toss the whole smoke detector and buy a new one. Heroic efforts aside. So you don't need to find the right battery. FWIW many smoke detectors bought in the past 10-15 years (I dunno but something like that) even with typical replaceable batteries have some sort of timer in them so when they hit 10 years they begin beeping in a slightly different pattern (like two short beeps every 60 seconds) and replacing the battery doesn't help. It just begins doing that on the fresh battery until you figure out that you need to toss the detector and buy a new one. Ran into that, looked it up on their web site as I was confused why a new battery wasn't helping and they confirmed that means the detector has expired buy a new one. I assume these 10 year sealed smoke detectors somehow came out of that. > > - Original Message - > > From: "William Herrin" > > To: "jra" > > Cc: b...@theworld.com, nanog@nanog.org > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 11:52:47 PM > > Subject: Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and > > Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study) > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 7:58 PM Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > >> Last time I looked, consumer residential smoke detectors were still > >> running > >> off 9V alkaline batteries, which are expected to run the device for 6 > >> months > >> of 1/99 duty cycle (or less, probably *way* less). > > > > Ordinary ionization-based smoke detectors use a 10-year lithium > > battery, which is about the same lifespan as the americium-based > > detector circuit as it begins to decay into neptunium. > > > > You may now resume your argument over how much battery drain is too much. > > > > Regards, > > Bill Herrin > > > > > > -- > > Hire me! https://bill.herrin.us/resume/ > > -- > Jay R. Ashworth Baylink > j...@baylink.com > Designer The Things I Think RFC > 2100 > Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover > DII > St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 > 1274 -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
(Topic at hand was just building an emergency alert system into smoke detectors rather than try to come up with some complex internet-oriented design.) On January 14, 2021 at 03:56 j...@baylink.com (Jay R. Ashworth) wrote: > Last time I looked, consumer residential smoke detectors were still running > off 9V alkaline batteries, which are expected to run the device for 6 months > of 1/99 duty cycle (or less, probably *way* less). Look again, as I said in the OP most consumer smoke detectors today are sealed ten year, can't replace the battery (well, not without surgery.) I've no idea off-hand what they're using inside tho it's probably not difficult to find out, $10 and a hammer if nothing else. > > An Energizer 9v is rated for 8.4VDC in the very general vicinity of 500mAh. > > > How does that compare to other factors like ambient temperature which > > also affects battery life but we mostly consider "in the noise"? > > A lot. Increasing the alert count from the 1 or 2 it probably is on most > smoke alarms to 2 or 3 a *week*, with LOUD analog speaker alert playback is > going to change that duty cycle, probably, to something like 10/90. > [ All numbers pulled out of my butt for illustration, but probably within > half an order of magnitude. ] I don't understand what you're designing but all I was suggesting was a smoke detector with a built in RF switch which upon hearing the magic signal started squawking "EMERGENCY ALERT!" or similar, perhaps with a coded word or two like "EMERGENCY TORNADO ALERT!" or perhaps a brief suggestion to consult your favorite emergency medium immediately (TV, radio, phone, religious text, etc.) Or perhaps that would be understood if it ever starts squawking "EMERGENCY ALERT!" or similar. Some of them now just start barking "EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! FIRE! FIRE! GET OUT OF THE HOUSE" over and over. I hear them go off nearby fairly regularly so that rings in my head I'm not making it up. > > > Could we make the battery just a little more powerful? How much power > > would a bit of circuitry waiting for a "turn on! there's a new message > > coming in!" need? > > Well, parsing for EAS on the receiver is going to make its drain non-trivial, > too, I think. > > But there are "increasing the battery replacement frequency" problems *and* > "increasing the battery capacity and hence price, not to mention general > availability" problems balancing that out. > > Any way you play it, it has to be an optional model, not a general takeover > of the field, I suspect, or the "well we just won't bother anymore" factor > takes over. But none of these power problems etc applies to any of the other proposed solutions? Phones etc? Or internet connections in general? Meh, I'd like to hear the thoughts of a smoke detector product engineer. My WAG is the only major objection would be that they're already neck deep in regulatory compliance and OMG this would add another layer of that, new orgs to answer to, new paperwork, etc. But so what else is new, ask marketing if it'd be worthwhile anyhow. > Cheers, > -- jra > -- > Jay R. Ashworth Baylink > j...@baylink.com > Designer The Things I Think RFC > 2100 > Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover > DII > St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 > 1274 -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
Well, it probably gets way worse: if it's a "permanent" battery, it will be harder to find, and harder to replace... - Original Message - > From: "William Herrin" > To: "jra" > Cc: b...@theworld.com, nanog@nanog.org > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 11:52:47 PM > Subject: Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and > Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study) > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 7:58 PM Jay R. Ashworth wrote: >> Last time I looked, consumer residential smoke detectors were still running >> off 9V alkaline batteries, which are expected to run the device for 6 months >> of 1/99 duty cycle (or less, probably *way* less). > > Ordinary ionization-based smoke detectors use a 10-year lithium > battery, which is about the same lifespan as the americium-based > detector circuit as it begins to decay into neptunium. > > You may now resume your argument over how much battery drain is too much. > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > > -- > Hire me! https://bill.herrin.us/resume/ -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 7:58 PM Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > Last time I looked, consumer residential smoke detectors were still running > off 9V alkaline batteries, which are expected to run the device for 6 months > of 1/99 duty cycle (or less, probably *way* less). Ordinary ionization-based smoke detectors use a 10-year lithium battery, which is about the same lifespan as the americium-based detector circuit as it begins to decay into neptunium. You may now resume your argument over how much battery drain is too much. Regards, Bill Herrin -- Hire me! https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
End-user Alert Delivery (was Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
- Original Message - > From: b...@theworld.com > On January 4, 2021 at 21:19 valdis.kletni...@vt.edu (Valdis Klētnieks) wrote: > > First, that means your smoke alarm batteries run down faster, which is > > a major issue. > > That's the sort of argument I label "all sign, no magnitude". > > How much faster? If it took one minute of battery life off a 10 year > battery would that be a problem? 30 minutes? Well, let's address that. Last time I looked, consumer residential smoke detectors were still running off 9V alkaline batteries, which are expected to run the device for 6 months of 1/99 duty cycle (or less, probably *way* less). An Energizer 9v is rated for 8.4VDC in the very general vicinity of 500mAh. > How does that compare to other factors like ambient temperature which > also affects battery life but we mostly consider "in the noise"? A lot. Increasing the alert count from the 1 or 2 it probably is on most smoke alarms to 2 or 3 a *week*, with LOUD analog speaker alert playback is going to change that duty cycle, probably, to something like 10/90. [ All numbers pulled out of my butt for illustration, but probably within half an order of magnitude. ] > Could we make the battery just a little more powerful? How much power > would a bit of circuitry waiting for a "turn on! there's a new message > coming in!" need? Well, parsing for EAS on the receiver is going to make its drain non-trivial, too, I think. But there are "increasing the battery replacement frequency" problems *and* "increasing the battery capacity and hence price, not to mention general availability" problems balancing that out. Any way you play it, it has to be an optional model, not a general takeover of the field, I suspect, or the "well we just won't bother anymore" factor takes over. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Chris Adams" > Aren't the cell-based emergency alerts on all cell phones, not just > smartphones? CMAS/WEA uses SMS Cell Broadcast. I assume the SMS firmware on the phone has to know what to do about those, and I don't know how far that knowledge goes back in the deployment of SMS firmware, and it's all-fired difficult to find out, IME. Anything built in the last 4-5 years certainly should know; I've received CMAS on phones as far back as 2009 build or so... though I did need an app, and I had to steal one from another carrier than my own. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 01:27:07AM +1300, Mark Foster wrote: > I respect this in principle, but hyperbole serves no-one - a smartphone > only creates a "morass of privacy/security issues" if you let it. You can't be serious. Have you paid *any* attention to what's been going on in this ecosystem for the past N years? It's not as bad as the raging dumpsterfire in the IoT, but it's still bad. Why would I want to give myself security/privacy issues (that I currently don't have and thus don't need to solve/manage on an ongoing basis) in exchange for functionality I don't need or want? > A basic smartphone can be had for less than $100 USD, which would give > you calling, text messaging and emergency alerts. It would also give me a much less sturdy device and one that chews up its battery doing things that I have no use for. I [sometimes] use my phone for critical communications in hostile environments, so anything that doesn't increase the probability that it will work is just baggage. And as a bonus it would cost me more every time I lose or destroy one. ---rsk
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Brandon Martin wrote: but harder to understand for people who lack precise knowledge on what computers and OSes are. Hi, embedded developer here who spends a considerable amount of time writing firmware for "bare metal" systems with "no OS". I did it with a Z80 computer soldered by myself. I have fairly high confidence that what Mike was referring to was "whatever base level software ships on the doohickey and provides the underlying infrastructure for the user-visible 'apps' that move media from the Internet to the monitor". Mike, please correct me if I'm wrong. What? "base level software"? You miss that many functions including application ones was and still is performed by hardware, which is why I wrote to Mike: >> What makes the most sense is the underlying OS does the work and not >> each individual app. > It all depends on not OSes but devices. For example, these days, many functions of high end IP routers are performed by hardware. In that context, it doesn't really matter what the box is running. Could be Linux, could be Windows, could be QNX, could be a "while(1) scheduler" and some embedded IP stack. Regardless of whether a computer is with or without OS, no IP stack, part of which may be implemented by hardware, can generate emergency alert by itself, unless some UDP port is specified for it, which is what I have been saying. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/5/21 7:29 PM, Chris Adams wrote: I don't know if an unsubscribed cell phone gets the emergency alerts (I know you are supposed to be able to call 911 from any cell phone, even if not carrying paid service). If so, that'd be another cheap way to get alerts. They pretty much universally should as long as they still have a SIM in them (or are eSIM/ESN-only devices) to give them some idea of their preferred network to which to register. Even if not, they're supposed to register with the "best network available" for emergency calling and alerting only, though I'm not sure how robust that is. I have definitely received SMS-broadcast emergency alerts on an "inactive" phone that was on and not in airplane mode for various reasons, so it does seem to work. It was a CDMA2000 ESN-only device, though, so still had provisioning info. I usually keep such devices in airplane mode, if they're still in use, though, and obviously then the cell radio is inactive so no alerts.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Once upon a time, Mark Foster said: > So one has to ask at some level, whether the addition of emergency alerts and > the ability to maybe do some simple tasks on the fly when needed (which need > not include social media, or the use of location tracking services, or even > mobile data most of the time?) is worth anything to you. Aren't the cell-based emergency alerts on all cell phones, not just smartphones? -- Chris Adams
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
I respect this in principle, but hyperbole serves no-one - a smartphone only creates a "morass of privacy/security issues" if you let it. A basic smartphone can be had for less than $100 USD, which would give you calling, text messaging and emergency alerts. You don't need to spend many hundreds. (I myself run a mid-range device at about US$200 worth. I won't spend $800 or anything close to that for something I could just as easily lose or drop or break in in my pocket whilst doing "active" things). So one has to ask at some level, whether the addition of emergency alerts and the ability to maybe do some simple tasks on the fly when needed (which need not include social media, or the use of location tracking services, or even mobile data most of the time?) is worth anything to you. I feel like a cheap smartphone would be preferable to a smart smoke detector. At least the bits required to deliver the required functionality are already there and not needing to be invented. Mark. On 6 January 2021 10:39:52 pm NZDT, Rich Kulawiec wrote: >On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 09:08:06PM -0600, Billy Crook wrote: >> Then again how many people would benefit from adding this to online >> streaming, but don't already have cellphones that have emergency >alert >> popups that get their attention. The kind of people who don't have >> smartphones are going to be the ones still watching bunny ears >television >> anyway. > >I've worked in science and technology for a long time, and I've chosen >not >to have a smartphone. Not that I have to justify this decision to you, >but: (1) I spend a fair amount of my time in environments with poor/no >connectivity (2) I participate in activities that are likely to result >in the destruction or loss of the phone and (3) I use my phone...for >phone calls and the occasional text. So spending $40 rather than $800, >avoiding the morass of privacy/security issues involved in a >smartphone, >and maximizing available battery life seems like the best move. > >I know others who've made the same decision for similar reasons. > >---rsk -- Sent from a mobile device.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 09:08:06PM -0600, Billy Crook wrote: > Then again how many people would benefit from adding this to online > streaming, but don't already have cellphones that have emergency alert > popups that get their attention. The kind of people who don't have > smartphones are going to be the ones still watching bunny ears television > anyway. I've worked in science and technology for a long time, and I've chosen not to have a smartphone. Not that I have to justify this decision to you, but: (1) I spend a fair amount of my time in environments with poor/no connectivity (2) I participate in activities that are likely to result in the destruction or loss of the phone and (3) I use my phone...for phone calls and the occasional text. So spending $40 rather than $800, avoiding the morass of privacy/security issues involved in a smartphone, and maximizing available battery life seems like the best move. I know others who've made the same decision for similar reasons. ---rsk
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
>> On Jan 3, 2021, at 13:57, Michael Thomas wrote: >> >>> I just sent some mail to the myshakes folks at UCB asking if they have an >>> achitecture/network document. In their case for earthquakes it need to be >>> less than ~10 seconds so they are really pushing the limit. If they get >>> back to me, I'll share it here. >> The two platforms they support have APIs and infrastructure to make it work >> at large scale. > > Do you know where to find docs on it? I'd be curious because clearly this is > a hard problem. For iOS: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/setting_up_a_remote_notification_server For Android, I think this is the similar system: https://firebase.google.com/docs/cloud-messaging/ Ask
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 4:31 PM Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Matthew Petach said: > [...] > > I don't know if an unsubscribed cell phone gets the emergency alerts (I > know you are supposed to be able to call 911 from any cell phone, even > if not carrying paid service). If so, that'd be another cheap way to > get alerts. > Now *that* sounds like a good, feasible middle ground; simply ensure cellular devices don't need an active plan to get alerts sent, and we can give out older, donated phones to people who don't have their own to act as receivers for alerts. Much easier than trying to stuff receivers into smoke detectors! :) Thanks! > -- > Chris Adams > Matt
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Once upon a time, Matthew Petach said: > If we're going to postulate every citizen of the country having a cell > phone, > then we should first postulate the system whereby the government provides > them free to every citizen, with a minimum level of access provided free to > all users. You are going from a false base in this particular point, because the current alert systems all require people to purchase their own devices, except for locations with alert sirens. Even those are typically only designed to alert people outdoors (of course, if you live close enough, they'll wake you up, but that's not the primary intent). IF you own a cell phone, there's an alert system. IF you own a weather/all-hazards radio, there's an alert system. The government doesn't provide equipment to receive either of those. I feel that trying to shove alerts down a streaming path is a bad idea, because that's yet another geo-location thing the providers will get wrong. I agree that cell phones provide sufficient coverage already (nothing will be 100%), and for people that care, buy a radio. If you can't figure out to program it, get help - there are regular help days around here from TV stations and EMS and such (or at least there were pre-COVID). The alerts on cable TV are already annoying enough - I've been watching severe weather coverage of radar showing a cell moving towards my house when the alert comes on and takes over my TV for the time it takes to repeat what I've already heard from my weather radio. Now if I want to continue to see live radar coverage, I have to get out a portable TV and connect to the outside antenna (I cannot get good TV signals inside my house because of terrain, despite being only about 7-8 miles from the transmitters). I don't know if an unsubscribed cell phone gets the emergency alerts (I know you are supposed to be able to call 911 from any cell phone, even if not carrying paid service). If so, that'd be another cheap way to get alerts. -- Chris Adams
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 7:11 PM Billy Crook wrote: > Then again how many people would benefit from adding this to online > streaming, but don't already have cellphones that have emergency alert > popups that get their attention. The kind of people who don't have > smartphones are going to be the ones still watching bunny ears television > anyway. In other words, you're not going to reach the people who *don't *have > smartphones by ADDING more technology. > /* begin semi-annoyed and frustrated rant */ That would be incorrect. My partner is one of the more tech-savvy people on the planet; she's contributed code to the core sendmail implementation, she's single-handedly torn down and completely rebuilt the entire infrastructure for a silicon valley company in a matter of days following a compromise, she's written software for monitoring millions of devices within global networks. She consumes information voraciously online. She doesn't wiggle bunny ears on the television. And she's never bought a cell phone. If we're going to postulate every citizen of the country having a cell phone, then we should first postulate the system whereby the government provides them free to every citizen, with a minimum level of access provided free to all users. *Then* you might be able to start making broad, sweeping claims about who has cell phones, and who doesn't. Otherwise, you're kinda talking out your backside, saying "well, I own a cell phone, and I can't possibly imagine anyone like me not owning a cell phone, therefore they must not exist." The failure happening here is your ability to imagine the existence of people unlike yourself, not the failure of such people to actually exist. Up to now, they've simply fallen through the cracks. The Alert Study in question is simply asking "is there a way we can use technology so they no longer fall through the cracks?" It's a valid question to ask, and as I'm sitting scarcely a dozen feet from one of the people that explicitly falls into the category the study seeks to address, I can vouch that it is a non-zero population, and it is a population that is indeed missed by our current alerting systems. We may eventually decide it's too technologically challenging to serve them, and decide to let them continue falling through the cracks. But let's at least do the exercise of looking to see if a solution exists, rather than simply claiming the problem doesn't exist. Because I can personally attest that yes, there are technically savvy people who consume online content who have never bought a cell phone, and have no interest in paying dozens of dollars a month to a company for a device they have no desire to ever use. /* end rant */ Thank you for your time and patience in reading, or at least your silence in your use of the d key, Matt
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Tue, 05 Jan 2021 15:48:47 -0500, b...@theworld.com said: > How much faster? If it took one minute of battery life off a 10 year > battery would that be a problem? 30 minutes? I suspect the proper time units are closer to months rather than minutes. > How much power would a bit of circuitry waiting for a "turn on! there's a new > message coming in!" need? You also need a much larger bit of circuitry for frequency decoders, speakers and all the rest of it, and *most* of it has to be on all the time in order to detect that there's a new message coming in. It's going to cost a lot more energy-wise to monitor a frequency continuously than what's monitored inside a smoke alarm. Can you point at NOAA weather alert radio that has a 10 year battery in it? Because you're going to need pretty much the same circuitry if you're trying to cram all this into a smoke alarm. pgp4QSi8_Vy9H.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 2:50 PM wrote: > Could we make the battery just a little more powerful? How much power > would a bit of circuitry waiting for a "turn on! there's a new message > coming in!" need? [] If your network connectivity, or web browser, or cellular reception stops working; people realize very quickly that they aren't getting messages, and that something is wrong. Well, maybe, sometimes people break PMTU Discovery by firewalling off ICMP for "security", but even more often: People already ignore testing their smoke detectors. Emergency radios in smoke detectors would be too hard to test, so basically, people would not test them every week, or they would be annoyed by the weekly test, and defeat them - then when an actual emergency happens, 30% of the detectors, don't pick up a thing, because their local environment and signal propagation changed, they're in a signal dead zone, or the nearest NOAA transmitter was 100 miles away, and there was too much local interference to get a decodable message, anyways. Emergency receivers are subject to signal, reception, and coverage issues, even if you can put one in every smoke detector. They are a neat add-on, but do not displace the motivation to distribute true emergency messages over 100% of available services from 3rd party communication providers, including the internet, cellular networks, broadcast streaming, all services, etc. Devices used to access streaming services, and web content have a huge Advantage - End users receive ordinary content and communications on these devices every day, and there is a service provider to continually monitor services, so it makes sense to levy the responsibility upon those distribution providers and network operators - that will make a more reliable result, since end users don't require extra work to verify these are actually working, etc. For Smoke Detector + Emergency receiver.. Probably need to add external power. Might as well use a separate power supply and a separate unit. A smoke detector is microwatts, and a radio receiver with logic for decoding and processing the analog waveform is more than a hundred milliwatts. "Not turning on" - is a sure way to not receive a signal - RFI and EM are abundant, and active logic is required to discriminate a true message. > etc. -- -JH
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On January 4, 2021 at 21:19 valdis.kletni...@vt.edu (Valdis Klētnieks) wrote: > On Mon, 04 Jan 2021 15:33:10 -0500, b...@theworld.com said: > > Why wouldn't we just build this into 10-year battery smoke alarms, a > > simple radio receiver? > > First, that means your smoke alarm batteries run down faster, which is > a major issue. That's the sort of argument I label "all sign, no magnitude". How much faster? If it took one minute of battery life off a 10 year battery would that be a problem? 30 minutes? How does that compare to other factors like ambient temperature which also affects battery life but we mostly consider "in the noise"? Could we make the battery just a little more powerful? How much power would a bit of circuitry waiting for a "turn on! there's a new message coming in!" need? etc. > > I didn't bother thinking past that show-stopper, others can do so if they > wish... -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/4/21 9:07 PM, Masataka Ohta wrote: > but harder to understand for people who lack precise > knowledge on what computers and OSes are. Hi, embedded developer here who spends a considerable amount of time writing firmware for "bare metal" systems with "no OS". I have fairly high confidence that what Mike was referring to was "whatever base level software ships on the doohickey and provides the underlying infrastructure for the user-visible 'apps' that move media from the Internet to the monitor". Mike, please correct me if I'm wrong. In that context, it doesn't really matter what the box is running. Could be Linux, could be Windows, could be QNX, could be a "while(1) scheduler" and some embedded IP stack. Anything smart enough to fall under the purview of the discussion we're having regarding "streaming services" is going to have some sort of "OS-like" infrastructure that could, if desired, centrally handle these kinds of alerts so that every single streaming "app" doesn't have to concern itself with that. I can't fathom somebody making a "media streaming device" these days without that kind of separation of duties internally regardless of what actually runs underneath the user-visible application. It's not that you couldn't but rather that you wouldn't. -- Brandon Martin
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 7:11 PM Billy Crook wrote: > On Fri, Jan 1, 2021 at 4:13 PM Matt Hoppes < > mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote: > >> Just give users the ability to select what categories/severities they >> want to see, so I don't get disrupted every time there's a scary rain storm >> coming or some divorcee is behind on child-support. > > Yesterday I was mildly indifferent. Today, after receiving SIX zarking Amber alerts between 8 PM and 11 PM local time, I suddenly have a strong opinion. Talk about alert fatigue. The sixth alert I received could have been for the world ending. I still wouldn't have looked at my phone. Thankfully I can adjust the default setting to disable everything except "presidental emergency alerts"...whatever that is. As long as I can turn it off completely, I'm fine with people baking that crap into their tech. I still want my wired Nest smoke alarm to be able to pick up NWS alerts though. -A
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
> If YouTube can mash back-to-back unskippable ads on demand into content, > they can put an emergency alert in there, and I bet people would like them > more than the ads. +1 to that. If a real-time ad exchange can run a market auction to serve you highly targeted ads in fractions of a second I am sure it is technically possible to match an alert to a broad geo area and serve an emergency alert. > Solution, seeking problem which explains why it's coming out of the federal > government. Can't we just scrap it and have that tax money back please, > mkay? How about we NOT build another mechanism for the government to incite > panic? Did we learn nothing from 2020? I suggest that EAS & E911 are pretty important services that society relies upon and does save lives (e.g. tornado warnings via EAS) when seconds make a difference. As people move to new devices & services these services should follow & evolve - ranging from EAS via video streaming to E911 over text/video/VoIP. Jason
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
That requires cell coverage. That requires the person to be capable of receiving the alert at the time (not engrossed in a TV show or game). If the mobile wireless networks were sufficient, this whole proceeding wouldn't be needed. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Richard Porter" To: "NANOG list" Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 10:40:28 PM Subject: Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:25 PM Chris Adams < c...@cmadams.net > wrote: Once upon a time, Billy Crook < bcr...@unrealservers.net > said: > On a technical note (having read the comment about overloading the system) > could a system like DNS help handle this? I wouldn't think so, because some of the important alerts are very time sensitive. It's been mentioned several times in this thread that the earthquake alerts are on the order of 10 seconds in advance. I know someone that survived a tornado by a few seconds (the time it took to get out of bed and get to the bedroom door as the tornado dropped the second floor of the house on the bed). 4G/LTE/5G networks could be further leveraged for this. In Denton County, TX, USA, you can register to "opt in" to receive weather alerts. We get tornadoes here. I could see better leveraging of that technology than streaming services. It is uncommon to find anyone without a cell phone in the US anymore. EMS services in some states leverage private 3G/4G networks for real-time communications. Wider reach in population clusters. To be useful for the worst events, they need to be push, and push in very short order. And since those are the alerts most likely to be life-saving, those are what the system needs to be built for (or what's the point). And to the point of the weather service sending out more alerts than in the past: yes, they do. To some extent, it's better radars and software to find hazards; they're also learning all the time to better identify what is and is not a threat (so there are storms that might have had a warning 10 years ago that might not today). But I'll take extra alerts now and then... a friend died in a tornado years ago because the warning came after it was on the ground (and probably after they were dead). -- Chris Adams < c...@cmadams.net >
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Google and Apple already have push systems that can be the model for how they push out alerts for these services, if not just use those very systems. Roku, Amazon, Microsoft, Samsung, etc. can work out similar systems. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Chris Adams" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 10:23:32 PM Subject: Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study Once upon a time, Billy Crook said: > On a technical note (having read the comment about overloading the system) > could a system like DNS help handle this? I wouldn't think so, because some of the important alerts are very time sensitive. It's been mentioned several times in this thread that the earthquake alerts are on the order of 10 seconds in advance. I know someone that survived a tornado by a few seconds (the time it took to get out of bed and get to the bedroom door as the tornado dropped the second floor of the house on the bed). To be useful for the worst events, they need to be push, and push in very short order. And since those are the alerts most likely to be life-saving, those are what the system needs to be built for (or what's the point). And to the point of the weather service sending out more alerts than in the past: yes, they do. To some extent, it's better radars and software to find hazards; they're also learning all the time to better identify what is and is not a threat (so there are storms that might have had a warning 10 years ago that might not today). But I'll take extra alerts now and then... a friend died in a tornado years ago because the warning came after it was on the ground (and probably after they were dead). -- Chris Adams
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Richard Porter" > On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:25 PM Chris Adams wrote: >> I wouldn't think so, because some of the important alerts are very time >> sensitive. It's been mentioned several times in this thread that the >> earthquake alerts are on the order of 10 seconds in advance. I know >> someone that survived a tornado by a few seconds (the time it took to >> get out of bed and get to the bedroom door as the tornado dropped the >> second floor of the house on the bed). >> > 4G/LTE/5G networks could be further leveraged for this. In Denton County, > TX, USA, you can register to "opt in" to receive weather alerts. We get > tornadoes here. I could see better leveraging of that technology than > streaming services. It is uncommon to find anyone without a cell phone in > the US anymore. Yup; it's called Commercial Mobile Alerting Service (Or Wireless Emergency Alerts, if you're a consumer), and it's been deployed, over SMS Cell Broadcast, for about 10 years now, depending on your carrier. NWS can actually send Tornado WARNINGS *to specific sectors of specific towers*, so they can warn exactly the people necessary in real-time... if it's implemented correctly along the entire path. I'm not actually certain which carriers if any have actually deployed the enchilada. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:25 PM Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Billy Crook said: > > On a technical note (having read the comment about overloading the > system) > > could a system like DNS help handle this? > > I wouldn't think so, because some of the important alerts are very time > sensitive. It's been mentioned several times in this thread that the > earthquake alerts are on the order of 10 seconds in advance. I know > someone that survived a tornado by a few seconds (the time it took to > get out of bed and get to the bedroom door as the tornado dropped the > second floor of the house on the bed). > 4G/LTE/5G networks could be further leveraged for this. In Denton County, TX, USA, you can register to "opt in" to receive weather alerts. We get tornadoes here. I could see better leveraging of that technology than streaming services. It is uncommon to find anyone without a cell phone in the US anymore. EMS services in some states leverage private 3G/4G networks for real-time communications. Wider reach in population clusters. > To be useful for the worst events, they need to be push, and push in > very short order. And since those are the alerts most likely to be > life-saving, those are what the system needs to be built for (or what's > the point). > > And to the point of the weather service sending out more alerts than in > the past: yes, they do. To some extent, it's better radars and software > to find hazards; they're also learning all the time to better identify > what is and is not a threat (so there are storms that might have had a > warning 10 years ago that might not today). But I'll take extra alerts > now and then... a friend died in a tornado years ago because the warning > came after it was on the ground (and probably after they were dead). > > -- > Chris Adams >
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Once upon a time, Billy Crook said: > On a technical note (having read the comment about overloading the system) > could a system like DNS help handle this? I wouldn't think so, because some of the important alerts are very time sensitive. It's been mentioned several times in this thread that the earthquake alerts are on the order of 10 seconds in advance. I know someone that survived a tornado by a few seconds (the time it took to get out of bed and get to the bedroom door as the tornado dropped the second floor of the house on the bed). To be useful for the worst events, they need to be push, and push in very short order. And since those are the alerts most likely to be life-saving, those are what the system needs to be built for (or what's the point). And to the point of the weather service sending out more alerts than in the past: yes, they do. To some extent, it's better radars and software to find hazards; they're also learning all the time to better identify what is and is not a threat (so there are storms that might have had a warning 10 years ago that might not today). But I'll take extra alerts now and then... a friend died in a tornado years ago because the warning came after it was on the ground (and probably after they were dead). -- Chris Adams
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Fri, Jan 1, 2021 at 4:13 PM Matt Hoppes < mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote: > How would that even work? Force a pop up into web traffic? What if the > end users is using an app on a phone? Mitch please If YouTube can mash back-to-back unskippable ads on demand into content, they can put an emergency alert in there, and I bet people would like them more than the ads. Just give users the ability to select what categories/severities they want to see, so I don't get disrupted every time there's a scary rain storm coming or some divorcee is behind on child-support. On a technical note (having read the comment about overloading the system) could a system like DNS help handle this? i.e. put the alerts in TXT records. every playback device can check for them at the US, state, county level. The TXT record links to an https JSON/XML with more detail, link to video. ISPs cache them to reduce load, TTLs prevent unnecessary traffic because everybody respects those Maybe the endpoints don't even query the federal records, but the county records instead, which mirror any relevant state and federal records, and counties that are too 'rural' just get managed by their state. I dug into how the actual emergency alerts in my area work many years ago and I could swear machine-formatted email was involved, at least regarding weather alerts. Then again how many people would benefit from adding this to online streaming, but don't already have cellphones that have emergency alert popups that get their attention. The kind of people who don't have smartphones are going to be the ones still watching bunny ears television anyway. In other words, you're not going to reach the people who *don't *have smartphones by ADDING more technology. Solution, seeking problem which explains why it's coming out of the federal government. Can't we just scrap it and have that tax money back please, mkay? How about we NOT build another mechanism for the government to incite panic? Did we learn nothing from 2020?
OT: StarterWare (was: Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study)
On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 11:07 +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote: > Mike Hammett wrote: > > No one cares about old hardware when solving a modern problem. > Modern examples do exist, for example: > > https://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/StarterWare But get in quick - the site will be removed on 15 January 2021. Regards, K. -- ~~~ Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au) http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Mon, 04 Jan 2021 15:33:10 -0500, b...@theworld.com said: > Why wouldn't we just build this into 10-year battery smoke alarms, a > simple radio receiver? First, that means your smoke alarm batteries run down faster, which is a major issue. I didn't bother thinking past that show-stopper, others can do so if they wish... pgp3oaogdfVKJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Mike Hammett wrote: No one cares about old hardware when solving a modern problem. Modern examples do exist, for example: https://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/StarterWare StarterWare is a free software development package that provides no-OS platform support for ARM and DSP TI processors. but harder to understand for people who lack precise knowledge on what computers and OSes are. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Comment inline On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 5:32 PM J. Hellenthal via NANOG wrote: > Comment inline > > -- > J. Hellenthal > > The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says > a lot about anticipated traffic volume. > > > On Jan 4, 2021, at 14:35, b...@theworld.com wrote: > > > > > > Why wouldn't we just build this into 10-year battery smoke alarms, a > > simple radio receiver? > > Someone contact gentex.com to go over the IoT thoughts. > Whatever could go wrong with putting *MORE* critical things on the internet *Sarcasm REALLY intended here*? The Video Game *Cyberpunk 2077* seems kinda prophetic? Let us not forget the Hawaii incident from Human error. https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/37260138/watch-gov-david-ige-on-what-triggered-ballistic-missile-false-alarm/ I think the internet ship sailed with RFC 1 ;) > > > > > > Why does anyone think this must be a feature of the internet when, as > > people here have described, that entails all sorts of complexities. > > > > You just want something that goes BEEP-BEEP-BEEP KISS YOUR ASS > > GOODBYE! BEEP BEEP BEEP really loudly on command, perhaps with some > > more detail. > > > > Probably about 10c in circuitry involved. > > > > We're really getting way into the cargo cult worship of the internet > > much like how TV in the 1950s was supposed to be the answer to every > > one of society's problems but mostly what we got were sitcoms and ads > > for bad beer. > > > > Ok, proceed with the list of edge cases. But at least there are laws > > requiring smoke alarms most everywhere. > > > > -- > >-Barry Shein > > > > Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | > http://www.TheWorld.com > > Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD > > The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo* >
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Comment inline -- J. Hellenthal The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume. > On Jan 4, 2021, at 14:35, b...@theworld.com wrote: > > > Why wouldn't we just build this into 10-year battery smoke alarms, a > simple radio receiver? Someone contact gentex.com to go over the IoT thoughts. > > Why does anyone think this must be a feature of the internet when, as > people here have described, that entails all sorts of complexities. > > You just want something that goes BEEP-BEEP-BEEP KISS YOUR ASS > GOODBYE! BEEP BEEP BEEP really loudly on command, perhaps with some > more detail. > > Probably about 10c in circuitry involved. > > We're really getting way into the cargo cult worship of the internet > much like how TV in the 1950s was supposed to be the answer to every > one of society's problems but mostly what we got were sitcoms and ads > for bad beer. > > Ok, proceed with the list of edge cases. But at least there are laws > requiring smoke alarms most everywhere. > > -- >-Barry Shein > > Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | > http://www.TheWorld.com > Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD > The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
RE: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Why wouldn't we just build this into 10-year battery smoke alarms, a simple radio receiver? Why does anyone think this must be a feature of the internet when, as people here have described, that entails all sorts of complexities. You just want something that goes BEEP-BEEP-BEEP KISS YOUR ASS GOODBYE! BEEP BEEP BEEP really loudly on command, perhaps with some more detail. Probably about 10c in circuitry involved. We're really getting way into the cargo cult worship of the internet much like how TV in the 1950s was supposed to be the answer to every one of society's problems but mostly what we got were sitcoms and ads for bad beer. Ok, proceed with the list of edge cases. But at least there are laws requiring smoke alarms most everywhere. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
> > Most civilized societies immensely value a great many things, and for > exactly zero of them is it acceptable for the government to kick down my > door, wake me up, and scrawl a message on my wall to make sure I hear > about it. Just because digital tools can save the government millions > of man-hours because they no longer have to go house-to-house doesn't > justify the theft and use of my personal property against my wishes. > Government Alerts on both IOS and Android are enabled by default, but the operating systems provide very simple toggles to disable them if you so choose. I'm also curious if you consider any unwanted notification or pop up on your devices as 'theft', because it's not. On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 4:17 AM Peter Kristolaitis wrote: > Most civilized societies immensely value a great many things, and for > exactly zero of them is it acceptable for the government to kick down my > door, wake me up, and scrawl a message on my wall to make sure I hear > about it. Just because digital tools can save the government millions > of man-hours because they no longer have to go house-to-house doesn't > justify the theft and use of my personal property against my wishes. > > > On 2021-01-04 3:56 a.m., Krassimir Tzvetanov wrote: > > Also a PSA: Amber alerts, Emergency alerts, and Public Safety alerts > > all go over cell broadcast. Think of it as a broadcast message on a > > LAN where the LAN is the local mobile phone cell. The reason you get > > that message 600 miles away for an amber alert is because in most > > civilized societies children's lives are immensely valued. And a 5-6 > > hour driving distance is not much knowing the lifecycle of reporting > > of such things and activation of the system, and also the time it > > takes for some of those kidnappings to be discovered before it can > > even be reported. >
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
*facepalm* No one cares about old hardware when solving a modern problem. Existing IP <-> geolocation methods, assuming they are up to date and have easy maintenance, are good enough. I know that assumption isn't always able to be made, but that's a separate conversation. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Masataka Ohta" To: "Mike Hammett" Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 9:50:11 AM Subject: Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study Mike Hammett wrote: > Every device that would be capable of doing anything also has an OS. Old computers had hardware (manually manipulated switches and light bulbs to read/write specific memory locations) to install boot strap loader to download OS without any OS. > The only involvement ISPs should have is ensuring that they have > proper IP <-> geolocation information Though IP layer has notion of location w.r.t. network topology, it is not geolocation, which is why there is no precise geolocation services to be relied by essential services such as emergency alert. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Mike Hammett wrote: Every device that would be capable of doing anything also has an OS. Old computers had hardware (manually manipulated switches and light bulbs to read/write specific memory locations) to install boot strap loader to download OS without any OS. The only involvement ISPs should have is ensuring that they have proper IP <-> geolocation information Though IP layer has notion of location w.r.t. network topology, it is not geolocation, which is why there is no precise geolocation services to be relied by essential services such as emergency alert. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 2:01 PM, Andy Brezinsky wrote: At this point I would assume that nearly every device is persisting at least one long lived TCP connection. Whether it's for telemetry or command and control, everything these days seems to have this capability. As an example, I can hit a button in the Nintendo Switch parent app on my phone and my kid's Switch is reflecting changes a second later. That's not even a platform I would have expected to have that capability. If they have an existing connection then there lots of high connection count solutions in the IOT space that could easily handle this number of connections. A single 12c 32G box running emqttd could handle 1.3M connections. Just picking a random AWS EC2 size machine, m5.4xlarge, would run you about $0.003/year per device to keep that connection open and passing data. I assume you could drive that down significantly from there. These days I would expect that just about everything has a websocket. I expect that google docs inspired a generation of applications. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Brandon Martin wrote: On 1/4/21 10:01 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: Any device with speaker should produce audible alert and any device with display should produce visible alert. I'm not sure typical North American residential construction could tolerate the sonic pressure generated by such a "goal"... It depends on FCC. Conventional devices like TVs only alert when on, In north America, maybe. But, many modern TVs in Japan will be turned on when they receive emergency earthquake alert over radio waves. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
I agree with Mike on this. On 1/4/21 10:17 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: Every device that would be capable of doing anything also has an OS. That OS is likely shared amongst multiple device models. The only involvement ISPs should have is ensuring that they have proper IP <-> geolocation information and your standard IP forwarding principles. ISPs should not be involved in the processing or design of any of this. It simply doesn't involve them. - 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> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> *From: *"Masataka Ohta" *To: *nanog@nanog.org *Sent: *Monday, January 4, 2021 9:01:57 AM *Subject: *Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study Mike Hammett wrote: > What makes the most sense is the underlying OS does the work and not > each individual app. It all depends on not OSes but devices. Any device with speaker should produce audible alert and any device with display should produce visible alert. As devices are identified at the IP layer, the alert must be distributed at the IP layer, that is, by ISPs. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Every device that would be capable of doing anything also has an OS. That OS is likely shared amongst multiple device models. The only involvement ISPs should have is ensuring that they have proper IP <-> geolocation information and your standard IP forwarding principles. ISPs should not be involved in the processing or design of any of this. It simply doesn't involve them. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Masataka Ohta" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 9:01:57 AM Subject: Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study Mike Hammett wrote: > What makes the most sense is the underlying OS does the work and not > each individual app. It all depends on not OSes but devices. Any device with speaker should produce audible alert and any device with display should produce visible alert. As devices are identified at the IP layer, the alert must be distributed at the IP layer, that is, by ISPs. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Then modify the underlying OS to accommodate it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Michael Thomas" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 8:53:38 AM Subject: Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study On 1/4/21 6:44 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: What makes the most sense is the underlying OS does the work and not each individual app. The underlying OS gets these alerts from some aggregator that collects this information from all jurisdictions. Doing it at the app layer seems foolish. That probably makes sense generally, but for things like earthquakes which have tight requirements (= < 10 seconds), you probably need specialized apps. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/4/21 10:01 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: Any device with speaker should produce audible alert and any device with display should produce visible alert. I'm not sure typical North American residential construction could tolerate the sonic pressure generated by such a "goal"... Streaming devices, sure. They're in-line with conventional distribution channels for emergency alerts such as television, radio, etc. That would include "smart speakers", TV streaming sources, etc. But my refrigerator, washing machine, etc. does not need to do this...many could (they have Internet connectivity in some cases), but that's just overkill and honestly silly. I'm also of the mindset that, in the end, the owner/operator of a given device should be given the authority to disable emergency alerts on that device. It's their device, after all. They may have other ways they prefer to receive such alerts, or they may want to die in a tornado. I'm not going to stop them. Conventional devices like TVs only alert when on, and things like weather radios can be placed into a non-alerting mode without losing other owner-relevant functionality. I'll note that most mobile phones allow the user to turn off most (though usually not all) emergency alerts. Non-OEM OS ROMs often go further. -- Brandon Martin
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Michael Thomas wrote: That probably makes sense generally, but for things like earthquakes which have tight requirements (= < 10 seconds), you probably need specialized apps. From regulatory point of view, it merely means that devices sold in some regulatory region (such as US regulated by FCC), are regulatory required to support specialized mechanism, maybe as OS internal functionality or maybe as application bundled with OS, for regulatory required alert. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Mike Hammett wrote: What makes the most sense is the underlying OS does the work and not each individual app. It all depends on not OSes but devices. Any device with speaker should produce audible alert and any device with display should produce visible alert. As devices are identified at the IP layer, the alert must be distributed at the IP layer, that is, by ISPs. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/4/21 6:44 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: What makes the most sense is the underlying OS does the work and not each individual app. The underlying OS gets these alerts from some aggregator that collects this information from all jurisdictions. Doing it at the app layer seems foolish. That probably makes sense generally, but for things like earthquakes which have tight requirements (= < 10 seconds), you probably need specialized apps. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
What makes the most sense is the underlying OS does the work and not each individual app. The underlying OS gets these alerts from some aggregator that collects this information from all jurisdictions. Doing it at the app layer seems foolish. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Matt Hoppes" To: "Sean Donelan" Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, January 1, 2021 4:12:40 PM Subject: Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study How would that even work? Force a pop up into web traffic? What if the end users is using an app on a phone? > On Jan 1, 2021, at 5:10 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: > > > The House on Monday and the Senate on Friday have overriden the President's > veto of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 passing > it into law. > > Among the NDAA's various sections, it includes the Reliable Emergency Alert > Distribution Improvement (READI) Act. The READI Act includes a study and > report for Emergency Alerts via the internet and streaming services. > > > SEC. 9201. RELIABLE EMERGENCY ALERT DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENT. > [...] > (e) INTERNET AND ONLINE STREAMING SERVICES EMERGENCY ALERT EXAMINATION.— > (1) STUDY.—Not later than 180 days after the date of > enactment of this Act, and after providing public notice and > opportunity for comment, the Commission shall complete an > inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency > Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided > through the internet, including through streaming services.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Valdis Klētnieks wrote: That's why I think doing it at the streaming service level is one level too high. As IP layer is the highest location dependent layer, any layer above it needs special mechanism to explicitly treat location information, which does not scale especially at international scale, though many of you might think FCC can control all the foreign operators. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Most civilized societies immensely value a great many things, and for exactly zero of them is it acceptable for the government to kick down my door, wake me up, and scrawl a message on my wall to make sure I hear about it. Just because digital tools can save the government millions of man-hours because they no longer have to go house-to-house doesn't justify the theft and use of my personal property against my wishes. On 2021-01-04 3:56 a.m., Krassimir Tzvetanov wrote: Also a PSA: Amber alerts, Emergency alerts, and Public Safety alerts all go over cell broadcast. Think of it as a broadcast message on a LAN where the LAN is the local mobile phone cell. The reason you get that message 600 miles away for an amber alert is because in most civilized societies children's lives are immensely valued. And a 5-6 hour driving distance is not much knowing the lifecycle of reporting of such things and activation of the system, and also the time it takes for some of those kidnappings to be discovered before it can even be reported.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
I am impressed that this thread made it to the drain in less than a day, so here are my few cents on the topic. First, the NDAA does not prescribe port numbers, or any other technology, as no policy document EVER should. It's plain and simple. Mark Foster covered it well, but here is a slightly different point - if the government needs to insert _high priority programming_ whatever you are operating it needs to be able to do that. Now think about your deer grandma (on the one you hate but the dear one), who is sitting on her couch immersed in YouTube jumping cats videos, while there is a tornado in the area. Wouldn't you be happy that YouTube implemented the alert system so grandma now knows she needs to go in the shelter? It is impressive how everyone got worked up on the veto and didn't pay attention to what was written in the NDAA but I'll let people read through it as I don't think this list is suitable for political discussions. Also a PSA: Amber alerts, Emergency alerts, and Public Safety alerts all go over cell broadcast. Think of it as a broadcast message on a LAN where the LAN is the local mobile phone cell. The reason you get that message 600 miles away for an amber alert is because in most civilized societies children's lives are immensely valued. And a 5-6 hour driving distance is not much knowing the lifecycle of reporting of such things and activation of the system, and also the time it takes for some of those kidnappings to be discovered before it can even be reported. Cheers, On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 2:00 AM Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 1/2/21 22:40, Sabri Berisha wrote: > > > Aliens always invade New York, so I'm safe up here :) > > I thought that was Roswell :-). > > Mark. >
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/2/21 22:40, Sabri Berisha wrote: Aliens always invade New York, so I'm safe up here :) I thought that was Roswell :-). Mark.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 5:03 PM Keith Medcalf wrote: > >I think the challenge here is that there's a category of people > >who don't have cell phones, who don't have cable TV, but > >receive content over their internet connection. I happen to > >live with someone like that, so I know it's a non-zero portion > >of the population. > > I pay for my Internet connection and I do not want "your shit" to be > spending "my money". If you think this is oh so important then *YOU* can > pay to install at your sole expense, a device which emits your silly > warnings -- I do not want them. You will also have to negotiate for > easement rights on my Private Property and those are not going to be given > away for cheap. > I take it you chant the same diatribe at your television when your video bandwidth is *stolen* by the emergency broadcast notification system, as it marches across the top of your screen? After all, you've paid for your television feed, and you don't want those "emergency broadcast messages" spending *your money*. Dammit, how dare they interrupt those precious seconds of the nightly news to tell you there's a flash flood warning for your county? There's already precedent set. I think that ship sailed long before you started attempting to drill holes through the hull. ;P Matt
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Keith Medcalf" >>I think the challenge here is that there's a category of people >>who don't have cell phones, who don't have cable TV, but >>receive content over their internet connection. I happen to >>live with someone like that, so I know it's a non-zero portion >>of the population. > > I pay for my Internet connection and I do not want "your shit" to be spending > "my money". If you think this is oh so important then *YOU* can pay to > install > at your sole expense, a device which emits your silly warnings -- I do not > want > them. You will also have to negotiate for easement rights on my Private > Property and those are not going to be given away for cheap. > > And even if you do pay me %1 Million a month that it will cost to acquire the > necessary easement on my Private Property, I will put your annoying shit > inside > a soundproof faraday cage in the closet. > > So you might as well just not bother. > > This is the same thing I tell shithead politicians and pollsters that cause my > phone to ring. If you wish to speak with me then you can pay to install your > own communications equipment at your own expense. That does not mean that I > will be answer or pay any attention to it or refrain from taking action to > prevent it from disturbing me. For the shitheads that use robotic callers I > have a wonderful digital war-dialer that can tie up a whole central switch -- > one way or the other the assholes will be forced to cease their disgusting > behaviour! Die in the tornado; I got no time for people like you anymore. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sun, 03 Jan 2021 18:00:22 -0700, "Keith Medcalf" said: > This is the same thing I tell shithead politicians and pollsters that cause > my phone to ring. If you wish to speak with me then you can pay to install > your own communications equipment at your own expense. Um... Keith? Pretty much all of them *do* pay for their end of the communications equipment. The bigger question is why you pay for *your* end rather than insisting that everybody who wants to talk to you pay for your end. (Hint: Do you require that the annoying sister in law you don't want to hear from also install gear at their expense? Does the answer change if you usually want to hear from her but not today because reasons?) pgpArJK3hSV4B.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 5:00 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote: I think the challenge here is that there's a category of people who don't have cell phones, who don't have cable TV, but receive content over their internet connection. I happen to live with someone like that, so I know it's a non-zero portion of the population. I pay for my Internet connection and I do not want "your shit" to be spending "my money". If you think this is oh so important then *YOU* can pay to install at your sole expense, a device which emits your silly warnings -- I do not want them. You will also have to negotiate for easement rights on my Private Property and those are not going to be given away for cheap. You pay your money to your ISP and your money ceases to give a shit what you want. Don't like it? Give it to somebody else who does. Mike
RE: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
>I think the challenge here is that there's a category of people >who don't have cell phones, who don't have cable TV, but >receive content over their internet connection. I happen to >live with someone like that, so I know it's a non-zero portion >of the population. I pay for my Internet connection and I do not want "your shit" to be spending "my money". If you think this is oh so important then *YOU* can pay to install at your sole expense, a device which emits your silly warnings -- I do not want them. You will also have to negotiate for easement rights on my Private Property and those are not going to be given away for cheap. And even if you do pay me %1 Million a month that it will cost to acquire the necessary easement on my Private Property, I will put your annoying shit inside a soundproof faraday cage in the closet. So you might as well just not bother. This is the same thing I tell shithead politicians and pollsters that cause my phone to ring. If you wish to speak with me then you can pay to install your own communications equipment at your own expense. That does not mean that I will be answer or pay any attention to it or refrain from taking action to prevent it from disturbing me. For the shitheads that use robotic callers I have a wonderful digital war-dialer that can tie up a whole central switch -- one way or the other the assholes will be forced to cease their disgusting behaviour! -- Be decisive. Make a decision, right or wrong. The road of life is paved with flat squirrels who could not make a decision.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 2:27 PM, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote: On Jan 3, 2021, at 13:57, Michael Thomas wrote: I just sent some mail to the myshakes folks at UCB asking if they have an achitecture/network document. In their case for earthquakes it need to be less than ~10 seconds so they are really pushing the limit. If they get back to me, I'll share it here. The two platforms they support have APIs and infrastructure to make it work at large scale. Do you know where to find docs on it? I'd be curious because clearly this is a hard problem. Piggybacking this sort of thing on another connection is trading some connection overhead for a whole lot of application complexity. This being nanog it’s unsurprising that the discussion is focusing on the connection and protocol bits, but those are a tiny part of the overall complexity (for the client, too). Well, the network is an interesting part in its own right because of the latency is so critical. I did notice that at least part of their sensor network is your phone itself. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 2:23 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: - Original Message - From: "Michael Thomas" Well, TCP means that the servers have to expect to have 100k's of open connections; I remember that used to be a problem. As for D'oH, sure; let's centralize the attack surface. The only reason I bring up DoH is because now there are tcp connection when the day before there were none. I haven't noticed any difference since firefox turned it, so they obviously figured out the scaling. Firefox is using one TCP connection to pipeline all the D'oH queries down? I assume so. DoH is just http running http2 or http3. Clearly getting servers to support millions of http sessions is doable these days. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Jan 3, 2021, at 13:57, Michael Thomas wrote: > I just sent some mail to the myshakes folks at UCB asking if they have an > achitecture/network document. In their case for earthquakes it need to be > less than ~10 seconds so they are really pushing the limit. If they get back > to me, I'll share it here. The two platforms they support have APIs and infrastructure to make it work at large scale. Piggybacking this sort of thing on another connection is trading some connection overhead for a whole lot of application complexity. This being nanog it’s unsurprising that the discussion is focusing on the connection and protocol bits, but those are a tiny part of the overall complexity (for the client, too). Ask
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Michael Thomas" >> Well, TCP means that the servers have to expect to have 100k's of open >> connections; I remember that used to be a problem. >> >> As for D'oH, sure; let's centralize the attack surface. > The only reason I bring up DoH is because now there are tcp connection > when the day before there were none. I haven't noticed any difference > since firefox turned it, so they obviously figured out the scaling. Firefox is using one TCP connection to pipeline all the D'oH queries down? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
At this point I would assume that nearly every device is persisting at least one long lived TCP connection. Whether it's for telemetry or command and control, everything these days seems to have this capability. As an example, I can hit a button in the Nintendo Switch parent app on my phone and my kid's Switch is reflecting changes a second later. That's not even a platform I would have expected to have that capability. If they have an existing connection then there lots of high connection count solutions in the IOT space that could easily handle this number of connections. A single 12c 32G box running emqttd could handle 1.3M connections. Just picking a random AWS EC2 size machine, m5.4xlarge, would run you about $0.003/year per device to keep that connection open and passing data. I assume you could drive that down significantly from there. On 01/03/2021 03:35 PM, Brandon Martin wrote: On 1/3/21 4:22 PM, Mark Delany wrote: Creating quiescent sockets has certainly been discussed in the context of RSS where you might want to server-notify a large number of long-held client connections very infrequently. While a kernel could quiesce a TCP socket down to maybe 100 bytes or so (endpoint tuples, sequence numbers, window sizes and a few other odds and sods), a big residual cost is application state - in particular TLS state. Even with a participating application, quiescing in-memory state to something less than, say, 1KB is probably hard but might be doable with a participating TLS library. If so, a million quiescent connections could conceivably be stashed in a coupla GB of memory. And of course if you're prepared to wear a disk read to recover quiescent state, your in-memory cost could be less than 100 bytes allowing many millions of quiescent connections per server. Having said all that, as far as I understand it, none of the DNS-over-TCP systems imply centralization, that's just how a few applications have chosen to deploy. We deploy DOH to a private self-managed server pool which consume a measly 10-20 concurrent TCP sessions. I was thinking more in the original context of this thread w.r.t. potential distribution of emergency alerts. That could, if semi-centralized, easily result in 100s of million connections to juggle across a single service just for the USA. While it presumably wouldn't be quite that centralized, it's a sizable problem to manage. Obviously you could distribute it out ala the CDN model that the content providers use, but then you're potentially devoting a sizable chunk of hardware resources at something that really doesn't otherwise require it. The nice thing is that such emergency alerts don't require confidentiality and can relatively easily bear in-band, application-level authentication (in fact, that seems preferable to only using session-level authentication). That means you could easily carry them over plain HTTP or similar which removes the TLS overhead you mention. Several GB of RAM is nothing for a modern server, of course. It sounds like you'd probably run into other scaling issues before you hit memory limitations needed to juggle legitimate TCP connection state.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 1:50 PM, Mark Delany wrote: On 03Jan21, Brandon Martin allegedly wrote: I was thinking more in the original context of this thread w.r.t. potential distribution of emergency alerts. That could, if semi-centralized, easily result in 100s of million connections to juggle across a single service just for the USA. While it presumably wouldn't be quite that centralized, it's a sizable problem to manage. Indeed. But how do you know the clients are still connected? And if they aren't, there is not much a server can do beyond discarding the state. Presumably the client would need to run a fairly frequent keep-a-live/reconnect strategy to ensure the connection is still functioning. Which raises the question: how long a delay do you tolerate for an emergency alert? I think the end result is a lot of active connections and keep-a-live traffic. Not really quiescent at all. In the end, probably just as cheap to poll a CDN. I just sent some mail to the myshakes folks at UCB asking if they have an achitecture/network document. In their case for earthquakes it need to be less than ~10 seconds so they are really pushing the limit. If they get back to me, I'll share it here. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 1:22 PM, Mark Delany wrote: Even with a participating application, quiescing in-memory state to something less than, say, 1KB is probably hard but might be doable with a participating TLS library. If so, a million quiescent connections could conceivably be stashed in a coupla GB of memory. And of course if you're prepared to wear a disk read to recover quiescent state, your in-memory cost could be less than 100 bytes allowing many millions of quiescent connections per server. Even at 1000 bytes, we're talking about 40GB for the entirety of California. You can get off the shelf cloud VM's with that easily these days, and 10 of those covers the US (ok, redundancy, but still...). That's probably why DoH wasn't a big deal. Throwing memory at a problem these days is probably easier than any heroic measures. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 03Jan21, Brandon Martin allegedly wrote: > I was thinking more in the original context of this thread w.r.t. > potential distribution of emergency alerts. That could, if > semi-centralized, easily result in 100s of million connections to juggle > across a single service just for the USA. While it presumably wouldn't > be quite that centralized, it's a sizable problem to manage. Indeed. But how do you know the clients are still connected? And if they aren't, there is not much a server can do beyond discarding the state. Presumably the client would need to run a fairly frequent keep-a-live/reconnect strategy to ensure the connection is still functioning. Which raises the question: how long a delay do you tolerate for an emergency alert? I think the end result is a lot of active connections and keep-a-live traffic. Not really quiescent at all. In the end, probably just as cheap to poll a CDN. Mark.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Brandon Martin" > The nice thing is that such emergency alerts don't require > confidentiality and can relatively easily bear in-band, > application-level authentication (in fact, that seems preferable to only > using session-level authentication). That means you could easily carry > them over plain HTTP or similar which removes the TLS overhead you mention. Sure. Just signing the alert packet so it can be authenticated is plenty. > Several GB of RAM is nothing for a modern server, of course. It sounds > like you'd probably run into other scaling issues before you hit memory > limitations needed to juggle legitimate TCP connection state. Well, yeah, but I don't know that it's *just* RAM; I suspect it might be data structure as well... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 4:22 PM, Mark Delany wrote: Creating quiescent sockets has certainly been discussed in the context of RSS where you might want to server-notify a large number of long-held client connections very infrequently. While a kernel could quiesce a TCP socket down to maybe 100 bytes or so (endpoint tuples, sequence numbers, window sizes and a few other odds and sods), a big residual cost is application state - in particular TLS state. Even with a participating application, quiescing in-memory state to something less than, say, 1KB is probably hard but might be doable with a participating TLS library. If so, a million quiescent connections could conceivably be stashed in a coupla GB of memory. And of course if you're prepared to wear a disk read to recover quiescent state, your in-memory cost could be less than 100 bytes allowing many millions of quiescent connections per server. Having said all that, as far as I understand it, none of the DNS-over-TCP systems imply centralization, that's just how a few applications have chosen to deploy. We deploy DOH to a private self-managed server pool which consume a measly 10-20 concurrent TCP sessions. I was thinking more in the original context of this thread w.r.t. potential distribution of emergency alerts. That could, if semi-centralized, easily result in 100s of million connections to juggle across a single service just for the USA. While it presumably wouldn't be quite that centralized, it's a sizable problem to manage. Obviously you could distribute it out ala the CDN model that the content providers use, but then you're potentially devoting a sizable chunk of hardware resources at something that really doesn't otherwise require it. The nice thing is that such emergency alerts don't require confidentiality and can relatively easily bear in-band, application-level authentication (in fact, that seems preferable to only using session-level authentication). That means you could easily carry them over plain HTTP or similar which removes the TLS overhead you mention. Several GB of RAM is nothing for a modern server, of course. It sounds like you'd probably run into other scaling issues before you hit memory limitations needed to juggle legitimate TCP connection state. -- Brandon Martin
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 03Jan21, Brandon Martin allegedly wrote: > On 1/3/21 3:11 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > Well, TCP means that the servers have to expect to have 100k's of open > > connections; I remember that used to be a problem. > > Out of curiosity, has anyone investigated if it's possible to hold open > a low-traffic, long-lived TCP session without actually storing state > using techniques similar to syncookies and do so in a compatible manner? Creating quiescent sockets has certainly been discussed in the context of RSS where you might want to server-notify a large number of long-held client connections very infrequently. While a kernel could quiesce a TCP socket down to maybe 100 bytes or so (endpoint tuples, sequence numbers, window sizes and a few other odds and sods), a big residual cost is application state - in particular TLS state. Even with a participating application, quiescing in-memory state to something less than, say, 1KB is probably hard but might be doable with a participating TLS library. If so, a million quiescent connections could conceivably be stashed in a coupla GB of memory. And of course if you're prepared to wear a disk read to recover quiescent state, your in-memory cost could be less than 100 bytes allowing many millions of quiescent connections per server. Having said all that, as far as I understand it, none of the DNS-over-TCP systems imply centralization, that's just how a few applications have chosen to deploy. We deploy DOH to a private self-managed server pool which consume a measly 10-20 concurrent TCP sessions. Mark.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 3:11 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: Well, TCP means that the servers have to expect to have 100k's of open connections; I remember that used to be a problem. Out of curiosity, has anyone investigated if it's possible to hold open a low-traffic, long-lived TCP session without actually storing state using techniques similar to syncookies and do so in a compatible manner? I suspect no since you don't have control over your peers sequence numbers, but then someone smarter than I came up with syncookies... -- Brandon Martin
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 12:11 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: - Original Message - From: "Michael Thomas" To: nanog@nanog.org On 1/2/21 10:31 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: Yup; it's messy, and in many many different ways. Won't be a snapshot rollout. Not a bad idea, though, if implemented correctly; time to dig out my notes, I guess. Is there a reason not to use an outbound tcp/quic connection? It was unthinkable years ago to use TCP with DNS, but now we have DoH and the world hasn't spiraled out of control. Heck if you made it a websocket you'd have a built in channel for multi-media html, etc. That is, just push a URL down and fire up a webview that the OS makes certain is in focus. Well, TCP means that the servers have to expect to have 100k's of open connections; I remember that used to be a problem. As for D'oH, sure; let's centralize the attack surface. The only reason I bring up DoH is because now there are tcp connection when the day before there were none. I haven't noticed any difference since firefox turned it, so they obviously figured out the scaling. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Michael Thomas" > To: nanog@nanog.org > On 1/2/21 10:31 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: >> Yup; it's messy, and in many many different ways. Won't be a snapshot >> rollout. Not a bad idea, though, if implemented correctly; time to dig >> out my notes, I guess. > > Is there a reason not to use an outbound tcp/quic connection? It was > unthinkable years ago to use TCP with DNS, but now we have DoH and the > world hasn't spiraled out of control. Heck if you made it a websocket > you'd have a built in channel for multi-media html, etc. That is, just > push a URL down and fire up a webview that the OS makes certain is in focus. Well, TCP means that the servers have to expect to have 100k's of open connections; I remember that used to be a problem. As for D'oH, sure; let's centralize the attack surface. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 12:02 PM Rich Kulawiec wrote: [snip] > streaming company need to be able to authenticate the alerts from > all those different agencies. Those agencies also need to secure [...] The agencies would already submit their alerts through IPAWS gateways managed by FEMA; otherwise every national satellite & cable provider have a similar challenge. The feds authenticate agencies and authorize those to use that service - the streaming companies only need a way to verify the message originated through that central authority. > And then there's another problem, which is that once all those different > agencies have this facility, they're going to (ab)use it as they see fit. [snip] I suppose abuse of authority or excessive use for any alerting system is bound to be a risk, no matter what. Not really a technical or network issue at all though.. (People could petition local elected officials and/or persuade others within their district, their neighbors, etc, to vote in new officials in that case, etc.) -- -JH
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Once upon a time, Rich Kulawiec said: > And then there's another problem, which is that once all those different > agencies have this facility, they're going to (ab)use it as they see fit. A year or two ago, Alabama issued a state-wide "blue alert" when a police officer was shot. So my weather/all-hazards radio alarm went off at 3am for something that happened 200 miles away. I then disabled that alert category. I only have severe weather warning categories enabled now (because tornadoes are a thing I do want to know about). -- Chris Adams
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 10:01 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: On Sun, Jan 03, 2021 at 03:26:07AM -0500, Valdis Kl??tnieks wrote: Meanwhile, this causes yet another problem - if Hulu has to be able to know what alerts should be piped down to my device, this now means that every single police and public safety agency has to be able to send the alerts to Hulu (and every other streaming company) - and do this securely. And then there's another problem (that I'm going to bet you've already thought of, given what you've written here): Hulu and every other streaming company need to be able to authenticate the alerts from all those different agencies. Those agencies also need to secure their sending infrastructure...and good luck with that. And then there's another problem, which is that once all those different agencies have this facility, they're going to (ab)use it as they see fit. I've noticed that over the last decade or so that weather alerts I've received are covering increasingly-less-severe events, e.g., we've slowly gone from "there's a tornado on the ground" to "there's going to be a thunderstorm". And at this particular point in history, I can think of one person who would be using this every five minutes simply because it's there. ---rsk One of the things that makes this challenging is that not all alerts are created equal. I just checked and the California earthquake alert system is now live. For that you have maybe 10 seconds so it needs to be hella fast at relaying the information. Other alerts are less strict, but still have a real time components like the tornado alerts. And then there are things that effectively have no real time component like Amber alerts. I'm curious how they built this: https://earthquake.ca.gov/ Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sun, Jan 03, 2021 at 03:26:07AM -0500, Valdis Kl??tnieks wrote: > Meanwhile, this causes yet another problem - if Hulu has to be able to > know what alerts should be piped down to my device, this now means that > every single police and public safety agency has to be able to send the > alerts to Hulu (and every other streaming company) - and do this securely. And then there's another problem (that I'm going to bet you've already thought of, given what you've written here): Hulu and every other streaming company need to be able to authenticate the alerts from all those different agencies. Those agencies also need to secure their sending infrastructure...and good luck with that. And then there's another problem, which is that once all those different agencies have this facility, they're going to (ab)use it as they see fit. I've noticed that over the last decade or so that weather alerts I've received are covering increasingly-less-severe events, e.g., we've slowly gone from "there's a tornado on the ground" to "there's going to be a thunderstorm". And at this particular point in history, I can think of one person who would be using this every five minutes simply because it's there. ---rsk
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/2/21 10:31 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: including foreign locations, generations of emergency alert packets *MUST* be responsibility of *LOCAL* ISPs. A problem is that home routers may filter the broadcast packets from ISPs, but the routers may be upgraded or some device to snoop the alert packets may be placed between ISPs and the routers. Yup; it's messy, and in many many different ways. Won't be a snapshot rollout. Not a bad idea, though, if implemented correctly; time to dig out my notes, I guess. Is there a reason not to use an outbound tcp/quic connection? It was unthinkable years ago to use TCP with DNS, but now we have DoH and the world hasn't spiraled out of control. Heck if you made it a websocket you'd have a built in channel for multi-media html, etc. That is, just push a URL down and fire up a webview that the OS makes certain is in focus. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sun, 03 Jan 2021 09:26:07 +, Mark Foster said:' > Yeah my family got a PS4 for Christmas. But we've had an Xbox One for > the last few years. There are quite a few streaming apps, true. But a > lot fewer of those than worldwide telcos, or jurisdictions, or emergency > services. You missed the point - Hulu would *still* have to deal with every single jurisdiction or emergency service in a secure manner. But any given ISP doing business in a given county would only have to deal with a very small number - and the local sheriff's office would only have to notify the small number of providers actually providing access in the county. > So do you want the streaming service to deliver the alert, or do you > want the underlying device doing the streaming, to deliver the alert? > Because I think you've gone down a layer and didn't need to. How do you deliver the alert if the device is on but no streaming service is currently active? And for a lot of devices, that's the usual state of affairs. As far as I know, most people who have a Google or Alexa smart device have it on close to 24/7, but the devices aren't streaming media that much. That's why I think doing it at the streaming service level is one level too high. pgpdmSdJuOZe6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/2/21 10:15 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote: Let's just go back to air-raid sirens. I'm old enough to remember when they were tested every day at noon, which also told you it was noon (lunch!) We'd say heaven help us if The Enemy attacked at noon. They still do in San Francisco garbled message and all as it echos through the streets. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/3/21 12:26 AM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote: On Sun, 03 Jan 2021 18:59:37 +1300, Mark Foster said: In my mind it's simple.� The streaming companies need to have a channel within their streaming system to get a message to a 'currently active customer' (emergency popup notification that appears when their app is open or their website is active with an authenticated user).� The Oh geez. Just on my PS4, there's streaming apps for Disney+, Netflix, Hulu, Prime, Playstation Store, Peacock, Tubi, ESPN+, AppleTV, YouTube (less than half of which I actually subscribe to, but I haven't found a big enough crowbar to remove the others, they keep returning) - and that's probably not a complete list. It also begs the question of what constitutes a "streaming service". Is my marketing department's slick new ad campaign video a "streaming service"? I could easily get engrossed in its valuable messaging and miss that tornado alert. Inline messaging is a complete dead end on the internet. Inline was because there was no other reasonable way to message on broadcast tv. That is definitely not the case now. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 2021-01-03 08:26, Valdis Klētnieks wrote: On Sun, 03 Jan 2021 18:59:37 +1300, Mark Foster said: In my mind it's simple.� The streaming companies need to have a channel within their streaming system to get a message to a 'currently active customer' (emergency popup notification that appears when their app is open or their website is active with an authenticated user).� The Oh geez. Just on my PS4, there's streaming apps for Disney+, Netflix, Hulu, Prime, Playstation Store, Peacock, Tubi, ESPN+, AppleTV, YouTube (less than half of which I actually subscribe to, but I haven't found a big enough crowbar to remove the others, they keep returning) - and that's probably not a complete list. And we get to watch them all do it in subtly different ways, often buggy. Egads. Yeah my family got a PS4 for Christmas. But we've had an Xbox One for the last few years. There are quite a few streaming apps, true. But a lot fewer of those than worldwide telcos, or jurisdictions, or emergency services. Bonus points for figuring out how to keep two streaming apps from stepping on each other's toes, as often these apps stay semi-alive in the background, which may be enough to cause an alert to be sent to the app. Now you need to avoid a "thundering herd" problem if there's 18 different streaming apps on the device, all of which just got woken up. On resource constrained systems, that's often the start of a death spiral as the system either runs totally out of memory or goes into thrashing mode. And the alternative is just saying "only the streaming app in the foreground gets to handle the alert", but that isn't correct either - I might not *have* a streaming app running in the foreground on the device at the time the alert goes out. (You hit another problem as well - now all the apps have to notify upstream So do you want the streaming service to deliver the alert, or do you want the underlying device doing the streaming, to deliver the alert? Because I think you've gone down a layer and didn't need to. Foregrounded App, delivering alert, feels doable. So having every single "streaming" app have to include duplicate code and *still* not get the alert to the user doesn't seem the right direction to go... If one wanted to target the console world or smart TV world, that's another way of doing it - but then you need Microsoft, Sony, Samsung, LG etc to all be doing essentially the same thing. Not impossible, but not precisely within the scope of 'online streaming services'. streaming company will also know the location of their customer (billing information) so will know what geographic locations are relevant to that customer. Billing info may be good enough for stuff that stays at home. It doesn't tell you what zip code a portable device is actually in at the moment - and getting the *right* localized info to the portable device is one of the tricky parts of this. If you're out and about town while visiting your in-laws 3 time zones away from where you live, you want alerts for the town your in-laws live, not for the address the streaming company sends the bill to. The problem that was trying to be solved, was people who literally don't have a mobile device. What category of device are you trying to alert to that wouldn't otherwise be able to receive an emergency broadcast? Seems like we're getting more-and-more niche. And that's assuming that a streaming company even *has* the info in their billing information - I just checked, and Hulu doesn't have a street address for me. So they're going to end up having to do IP based geolocation. ... or simply collect the geographic information required, retrospectively, in order to comply. Meanwhile, this causes yet another problem - if Hulu has to be able to know what alerts should be piped down to my device, this now means that every single police and public safety agency has to be able to send the alerts to Hulu (and every other streaming company) - and do this securely. That's a *lot* bigger problem than "The Blacksburg VA police department only has to set up agreements with network access providers that might be providing access to devices in Blacksburg". Sure. But the likes of Netflix will need a relationship with every single PD in the world? Scales nicely in one direction, but not the other. Seriously guys - having the streaming companies do this is at the entirely wrong level. I dunno. Providing an API and establishing a relationship with what has to be a relatively finite number of streaming providers seems not impossible. If Netflix put up an API and you built a hierarchy for emergency notifications (so perhaps your local PD don't directly talk to Netflix, but maybe they talk to someone at state level? Then there's a managable chain of relationships). If you're going to create a legislative or regulatory framework that requires the streaming operators to provide
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Mark Foster wrote: On 3/01/2021 2:41 am, Masataka Ohta wrote: Sean Donelan wrote: the Commission shall complete an inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided through the internet, including through streaming services. It is trivially easy to have a dedicated UDP port to receive broadcast packets for such purposes, as "through streaming services" is not the requirement. but "including" is... It's not feasible. The alert should be given by not services but devices running various services including streaming ones. And I don't see that opening up a UDP port on every end-user device to receive some sort of broadcast (unicast?) is going to be great security. Someone will find away to exploit it. It should be the responsibility of local ISPs to generate such packets and not to relay such packets generated by others. I think you're overthinking this. In my mind it's simple. The streaming companies need to have a channel within their streaming system You have successfully made the simple problem complex enough to be unsolvable. > Local Authorities can feed emergency broadcast information to the > streaming companies tagged with a geolocation Local authorities? You can't expect such locality for companies offering streaming or similar services over the Internet. Moreover, there is no reason to give precise definition of "streaming services" and not to give alert to users of similar services. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sun, 03 Jan 2021 18:59:37 +1300, Mark Foster said: > In my mind it's simple.� The streaming companies need to have a channel > within their streaming system to get a message to a 'currently active > customer' (emergency popup notification that appears when their app is > open or their website is active with an authenticated user).� The Oh geez. Just on my PS4, there's streaming apps for Disney+, Netflix, Hulu, Prime, Playstation Store, Peacock, Tubi, ESPN+, AppleTV, YouTube (less than half of which I actually subscribe to, but I haven't found a big enough crowbar to remove the others, they keep returning) - and that's probably not a complete list. And we get to watch them all do it in subtly different ways, often buggy. Egads. Bonus points for figuring out how to keep two streaming apps from stepping on each other's toes, as often these apps stay semi-alive in the background, which may be enough to cause an alert to be sent to the app. Now you need to avoid a "thundering herd" problem if there's 18 different streaming apps on the device, all of which just got woken up. On resource constrained systems, that's often the start of a death spiral as the system either runs totally out of memory or goes into thrashing mode. And the alternative is just saying "only the streaming app in the foreground gets to handle the alert", but that isn't correct either - I might not *have* a streaming app running in the foreground on the device at the time the alert goes out. (You hit another problem as well - now all the apps have to notify upstream So having every single "streaming" app have to include duplicate code and *still* not get the alert to the user doesn't seem the right direction to go... > streaming company will also know the location of their customer (billing > information) so will know what geographic locations are relevant to that > customer. Billing info may be good enough for stuff that stays at home. It doesn't tell you what zip code a portable device is actually in at the moment - and getting the *right* localized info to the portable device is one of the tricky parts of this. If you're out and about town while visiting your in-laws 3 time zones away from where you live, you want alerts for the town your in-laws live, not for the address the streaming company sends the bill to. And that's assuming that a streaming company even *has* the info in their billing information - I just checked, and Hulu doesn't have a street address for me. So they're going to end up having to do IP based geolocation. Meanwhile, this causes yet another problem - if Hulu has to be able to know what alerts should be piped down to my device, this now means that every single police and public safety agency has to be able to send the alerts to Hulu (and every other streaming company) - and do this securely. That's a *lot* bigger problem than "The Blacksburg VA police department only has to set up agreements with network access providers that might be providing access to devices in Blacksburg". Seriously guys - having the streaming companies do this is at the entirely wrong level. pgppzHA8EUtxt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
I've already had to spike one widely announced WAN UDP protocol that someone had proposed without thinking through security and DDOS features. Please don't let's try that trick again. We have perfectly good approaches that don't involve insecure untraceable transport layers. This isn't 1985. TCP and something SSL encrypted - HTTPS comes to mind, even if it gets its own port (11911 is available...). -george On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at 10:02 PM Mark Foster wrote: > > On 3/01/2021 2:41 am, Masataka Ohta wrote: > > Sean Donelan wrote: > > > >> the Commission shall complete an > >> inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency > >> Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided > >> through the internet, including through streaming services. > > > > It is trivially easy to have a dedicated UDP port to receive > > broadcast packets for such purposes, as "through streaming > > services" is not the requirement. > > but "including" is... > > And I don't see that opening up a UDP port on every end-user device to > receive some sort of broadcast (unicast?) is going to be great security. > Someone will find away to exploit it. > > > > > > As streaming services are often offered from distant places > > including foreign locations, generations of emergency alert > > packets *MUST* be responsibility of *LOCAL* ISPs. > > > > A problem is that home routers may filter the broadcast > > packets from ISPs, but the routers may be upgraded or > > some device to snoop the alert packets may be placed between > > ISPs and the routers. > > > I think you're overthinking this. > > In my mind it's simple. The streaming companies need to have a channel > within their streaming system to get a message to a 'currently active > customer' (emergency popup notification that appears when their app is > open or their website is active with an authenticated user). The > streaming company will also know the location of their customer (billing > information) so will know what geographic locations are relevant to that > customer. > > Local Authorities can feed emergency broadcast information to the > streaming companies tagged with a geolocation and the streaming company > will only rebroadcast it to those customers who are interested in that > geolocation. > > Providing for network-layer alerts of this nature is overcomplicated and > unnecessary - as was pointed out there are existing means to do this > (cellphone emergency broadcasts, weather radio service, etc) and the > intent appears to be to simply add another channel for those who might > not be able to receive the other. Asking the likes of Netflix to be able > to channel an brief emergency notifcation across a relevantly-located > customers streaming service doesn't actually seem that complex, and > because it's all 'in band' it requires no specific intervention from the > underlying network operator. > > Mark. > > -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 12:01 AM Mark Foster wrote: > And I don't see that opening up a UDP port on every end-user device to > receive some sort of broadcast (unicast?) is going to be great security. ... Yeah: This is probably best done by either requiring the streaming services to know where their customers' location is and relay a copy of any pertinent data to end users through their applications or to web browsers through headers, Or by having native software included with the OS on internet-connected devices to query a region-specific URL at a regular interval. This is much fewer packets if the data can be transferred over the headers of HTTPS connections which applications on end devices already make to various websites. The UDP port method is inefficient, at least if meet the requirements that would seem reasonable for emergency alert distribution on streaming devices (much the same as for other media...). 1. There should never be extra steps from an end user to "activate" emergency alerts - except steps which the device enforces must be done, before any content can be played. Notions such as computer users choosing to subscribe to IPAWS fail, at least, until some mechanism enforces that they do so. 2. If the device is able to view content, then emergency alerts must be working. The function to play alerts should not be able to be disabled and should resist tampering. If either an alert has been received, or emergency alerts would not be able to be received, then the normal play of content must be interrupted - the ability to access content should be disabled and be not allowed by the device's application or operating system until after it can be confirmed that all alerts have been fully played, or the error has been corrected. Problem is that UDP packets to X port could be easily intercepted and dropped by devices such as firewalls.Merely broadcasting the UDP port during an alert would not be enough, then; it would call for a regular broadcast to this port by every ISP to every user every few minutes, even when there are no alerts to relay. That would seem to be necessary for devices to be able to verify that alerts would be working and are not being tampered or interfered with. Devices would need to be designed to verify the latest UDP broadcast has been received and Self-Disable with an error message if too much time has passed with no update packet on that port; some type of crypto system would also be needed to verify that messages are authentic, and have not been forged, replayed, or altered. The regular UDP broadcast could not be only during an emergency, then, it would need to be every few minutes, otherwise the devices would have no way of ensuring their ability to receive alerts - that's a massive number of UDP messages to consider.. -- -JH
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Masataka Ohta" > To: nanog@nanog.org > Sean Donelan wrote: > >> the Commission shall complete an >> inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency >> Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided >> through the internet, including through streaming services. > > It is trivially easy to have a dedicated UDP port to receive > broadcast packets for such purposes, as "through streaming > services" is not the requirement. Though, sadly, 911/udp is taken, and by someone who may not exist anymore. Who owns the <1024 post list these days, IANA? > As streaming services are often offered from distant places > including foreign locations, generations of emergency alert > packets *MUST* be responsibility of *LOCAL* ISPs. > > A problem is that home routers may filter the broadcast > packets from ISPs, but the routers may be upgraded or > some device to snoop the alert packets may be placed between > ISPs and the routers. Yup; it's messy, and in many many different ways. Won't be a snapshot rollout. Not a bad idea, though, if implemented correctly; time to dig out my notes, I guess. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- Original Message - > From: "Valdis Klētnieks" > To: "Matt Hoppes" > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > On Fri, 01 Jan 2021 17:12:40 -0500, Matt Hoppes said: >> How would that even work? Force a pop up into web traffic? > > That's not going to play nicely at all in a world of https:// > >> What if the end users is using an app on a phone? > > I'm having a hard time thinking of what app I could *possibly* be using on a > phone where I wouldn't want an interruption for a tornado or active shooter > alert. This would probably -- on phones, at least -- involve tightening up the deployment of CMAS/WEA, and the apps that catch it, which are pretty crappy right now; at least the one on my LG-V20 is. > This was discussed in detail a while ago - I'm pretty sure the general > consensus was that having the phone/game console/smart home control center/ > whatever would be running an alert endpoint app that would talk to the ISP/ > cellphone tower and register for alerts and then DTRT to notify the relevant > carbon-based life forms. Yeah, I designed most of this about 10 years ago, and couldn't figure out where to wedge it in. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Let's just go back to air-raid sirens. I'm old enough to remember when they were tested every day at noon, which also told you it was noon (lunch!) We'd say heaven help us if The Enemy attacked at noon. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 3/01/2021 2:41 am, Masataka Ohta wrote: Sean Donelan wrote: the Commission shall complete an inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided through the internet, including through streaming services. It is trivially easy to have a dedicated UDP port to receive broadcast packets for such purposes, as "through streaming services" is not the requirement. but "including" is... And I don't see that opening up a UDP port on every end-user device to receive some sort of broadcast (unicast?) is going to be great security. Someone will find away to exploit it. As streaming services are often offered from distant places including foreign locations, generations of emergency alert packets *MUST* be responsibility of *LOCAL* ISPs. A problem is that home routers may filter the broadcast packets from ISPs, but the routers may be upgraded or some device to snoop the alert packets may be placed between ISPs and the routers. I think you're overthinking this. In my mind it's simple. The streaming companies need to have a channel within their streaming system to get a message to a 'currently active customer' (emergency popup notification that appears when their app is open or their website is active with an authenticated user). The streaming company will also know the location of their customer (billing information) so will know what geographic locations are relevant to that customer. Local Authorities can feed emergency broadcast information to the streaming companies tagged with a geolocation and the streaming company will only rebroadcast it to those customers who are interested in that geolocation. Providing for network-layer alerts of this nature is overcomplicated and unnecessary - as was pointed out there are existing means to do this (cellphone emergency broadcasts, weather radio service, etc) and the intent appears to be to simply add another channel for those who might not be able to receive the other. Asking the likes of Netflix to be able to channel an brief emergency notifcation across a relevantly-located customers streaming service doesn't actually seem that complex, and because it's all 'in band' it requires no specific intervention from the underlying network operator. Mark.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 02 Jan 2021, at 22.38, Matthew Petach wrote: > It doesn't look like there's currently any internet-capable way of > consuming the IPAWS feed, at least that a quick search engine > dive turns up. Wondering if any of the folks here know of providers > that have signed up with FEMA to redistribute the IPAWS feed > for free? (Yes, I found WeatherMessage, but their pricing and > platform restrictions made them a non-starter). That's a good point, though I still say a better solution is to improve the server capacity, put out apps for major platforms, and an API so smaller platforms can use it too. Making every streaming service do it is not a great way to do redundancy.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at 5:45 PM Max Harmony via NANOG wrote: > > On 02 Jan 2021, at 19.18, Matthew Petach wrote: > > I think the challenge here is that there's a category of people > > who don't have cell phones, who don't have cable TV, but > > receive content over their internet connection. I happen to > > live with someone like that, so I know it's a non-zero portion > > of the population. > > Emergency alerts are also on OTA TV (and radio), not just cable. People > whose sole communications device is a computer can subscribe to FEMA'S > IPAWS feed. People who can't (or don't want to) do that can use a weather > radio (despite the name, NWS broadcasts all hazards alerts, not just > weather). The most likely answer to "how do we get streaming services to > provide emergency alerts?" is to make them redistribute the IPAWS feed and > update their software to make the updates human-readable. It would probably > be cheaper to just tell people where to find free IPAWS software instead of > making every streaming service add the feature, and, as a last resort, give > people who need them free weather radios. > The FEMA IPAWS system doesn't seem well-suited for end-users to subscribe to it. Of note is the specific restriction: - Providers cannot stress IPAWS servers with excessive requests. Which might hint that the FEMA servers aren't intended to support hundreds of thousands of individuals connecting directly to them to request alert data. It doesn't look like there's currently any internet-capable way of consuming the IPAWS feed, at least that a quick search engine dive turns up. Wondering if any of the folks here know of providers that have signed up with FEMA to redistribute the IPAWS feed for free? (Yes, I found WeatherMessage, but their pricing and platform restrictions made them a non-starter). Thanks! Matt
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 02 Jan 2021, at 19.18, Matthew Petach wrote: > I think the challenge here is that there's a category of people > who don't have cell phones, who don't have cable TV, but > receive content over their internet connection. I happen to > live with someone like that, so I know it's a non-zero portion > of the population. Emergency alerts are also on OTA TV (and radio), not just cable. People whose sole communications device is a computer can subscribe to FEMA'S IPAWS feed. People who can't (or don't want to) do that can use a weather radio (despite the name, NWS broadcasts all hazards alerts, not just weather). The most likely answer to "how do we get streaming services to provide emergency alerts?" is to make them redistribute the IPAWS feed and update their software to make the updates human-readable. It would probably be cheaper to just tell people where to find free IPAWS software instead of making every streaming service add the feature, and, as a last resort, give people who need them free weather radios.
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at 6:51 AM Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi, > [...] > Just to be clear: this is talking about IP traffic, not things like > SMS-CB, right? When there are already cell broadcast alerts, I have the > feeling that adding alerts to IP traffic (however that would be > supposed to work) wouldn't add that much coverage… > > Cheers, > Sander > I think the challenge here is that there's a category of people who don't have cell phones, who don't have cable TV, but receive content over their internet connection. I happen to live with someone like that, so I know it's a non-zero portion of the population. For them, cell based alerts don't reach them, and cable TV inserted alerts don't reach them. Thus, the question of "can we reach them via IP-based alerting?" I think it's a good investigation to undertake, as there's clearly a population that is left out of the current alerting systems we have in place. Matt
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Fri, Jan 01, 2021 at 05:07:22PM -0500, Sean Donelan wrote: > Not later than 180 days after the date of > enactment of this Act, and after providing public notice and > opportunity for comment, the Commission shall complete an > inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency > Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided > through the internet, including through streaming services. I do hope that they consider the certainty that this will be subjected to abuse the moment it goes live. ---rsk
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/2/21 12:40 PM, Sabri Berisha wrote: - On Jan 1, 2021, at 2:12 PM, Matt Hoppes mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net wrote: Hi, How would that even work? Force a pop up into web traffic? What if the end users is using an app on a phone? Most, if not all, mobile devices connected to cellular already have that option. On my iphone it's under settings->notifications->government alerts. There are three separate options: Amber alerts, Emergency alerts, and Public Safety alerts. I wonder if that is wired in with the earthquake alerts i think you can get these days. Personally, I have all three turned off after receiving nonsens alerts. Amber alerts for children abducted in Los Angeles, only 600km (~450 miles) from the Bay Area, where I live, for example. Or a "public safety" alert telling me that there are too many people in the local Trader Joe's, 2 miles from my home. Aliens always invade New York, so I'm safe up here :) I beg your pardon, they have a bizarre fascination with Golden Gate Bridge. It's the oversized monkeys that like New York. Mike
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
- On Jan 1, 2021, at 2:12 PM, Matt Hoppes mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net wrote: Hi, > How would that even work? Force a pop up into web traffic? What if the end > users is using an app on a phone? Most, if not all, mobile devices connected to cellular already have that option. On my iphone it's under settings->notifications->government alerts. There are three separate options: Amber alerts, Emergency alerts, and Public Safety alerts. Personally, I have all three turned off after receiving nonsens alerts. Amber alerts for children abducted in Los Angeles, only 600km (~450 miles) from the Bay Area, where I live, for example. Or a "public safety" alert telling me that there are too many people in the local Trader Joe's, 2 miles from my home. Aliens always invade New York, so I'm safe up here :) Thanks, Sabri
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On 1/2/21 8:41 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: As streaming services are often offered from distant places including foreign locations, generations of emergency alert packets *MUST* be responsibility of *LOCAL* ISPs. I mean, if you know where you are, it's trivial to ask various services that already exist (in most cases, in some form) if there are emergency alerts for your location. It wouldn't be hard to make this a pubsub type system so that a device can just subscribe to it and be notified if it happens over a "NAT is everywhere" friendly long-term TCP session with TCP and occasionally application-level keepalives. Media streaming devices could essentially do this now. The governments which publish this information could help by running services that make this data more readily available in standard formats and with well-known locations and APIs. IDK if they currently do that. This is, IMO, how the Internet is supposed to work. Somebody makes content available. If you want it, ask them for it. The network just moves the data. ISPs are not typically in the business of flinging unsolicited traffic at endpoints. We're not cable companies (or at least some of us are not). And, as you point out, unsolicited UDP traffic is almost guaranteed to get dropped even if you have end-to-end address transparency as stateful firewalls are quite common even then. What the ISP can potentially help a lot with is having some easily-discovered service to provide the ISP's notion of "where am I (probably)?". I wouldn't expect E911 levels of granularity on this, or at least I don't think that's a reasonable request to make of most ISPs as that would require live data from DHCP, billing, etc. all to be put together in ways that could be difficult and cause security or privacy concerns. What I think IS feasible is something along the lines of a response that says "Well, the gear you're terminated on hosts customers within this city or zip code or whatever, so that's where you probably are." This is largely static data that you can infer based on large IP swaths (many ISPs already essentially put it in their synthesized rDNS) for many common configurations and is sufficient for filtering most kinds of emergency alerts. Devices which have GPS can obviously supplement/replace with their own location data. Devices which have access to Wi-Fi/Bluetooth beacon location databases can largely do the same. This is almost guaranteed to be more accurate AND more precise. -- Brandon Martin
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Hi, On Fri, 2021-01-01 at 17:07 -0500, Sean Donelan wrote: > The House on Monday and the Senate on Friday have overriden the > President's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act for > Fiscal Year 2021 passing it into law. > > Among the NDAA's various sections, it includes the Reliable > Emergency > Alert Distribution Improvement (READI) Act. The READI Act includes > a > study and report for Emergency Alerts via the internet and streaming > services. > > > SEC. 9201. RELIABLE EMERGENCY ALERT DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENT. > [...] > (e) INTERNET AND ONLINE STREAMING SERVICES EMERGENCY ALERT > EXAMINATION.— > (1) STUDY.—Not later than 180 days after the date of > enactment of this Act, and after providing public notice and > opportunity for comment, the Commission shall complete an > inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency > Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided > through the internet, including through streaming services. Just to be clear: this is talking about IP traffic, not things like SMS-CB, right? When there are already cell broadcast alerts, I have the feeling that adding alerts to IP traffic (however that would be supposed to work) wouldn't add that much coverage… Cheers, Sander signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
Sean Donelan wrote: the Commission shall complete an inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided through the internet, including through streaming services. It is trivially easy to have a dedicated UDP port to receive broadcast packets for such purposes, as "through streaming services" is not the requirement. As streaming services are often offered from distant places including foreign locations, generations of emergency alert packets *MUST* be responsibility of *LOCAL* ISPs. A problem is that home routers may filter the broadcast packets from ISPs, but the routers may be upgraded or some device to snoop the alert packets may be placed between ISPs and the routers. Masataka Ohta
Re: NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
On Fri, Jan 1, 2021, at 23:12, Matt Hoppes wrote: > How would that even work? Force a pop up into web traffic? What if > the end users is using an app on a phone? Like any other "commission-based study". Remember, the action is : "after providing public notice and opportunity for comment, the Commission shall complete an inquiry to examine the feasibility" Any eventual action requiring intervention of the operators (access or service) is not yet defined, and will follow at a later date (if ever).
