+1 googaplex On Sunday, April 26, 2015, David Milholen <dmilho...@wletc.com> wrote:
> George, > Take a different approach to net neutrality... > > Just because we sell a 5x5 to a customer and they think they can do a 4k > stream only paying $75 for that. > They are smoking something good. Our answer to the customer is you need > to upgrade to a custom package > for doing such demanding service required to run your really expensive TV. > We have a 50x10 service available for > your area which is only $800 a month(include grins) . Would you like to > sign up today for this service? > > > > On 4/26/2015 6:12 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) wrote: > > So you'd be purposely slowing down or blocking legitimate traffic from an > edge provider to the customer? Oh no, net neutrality violation! > > So when everyone starts with the 4k streaming and we're selling the > customer 20Mbps, then we have to take on 40Mbps because of this!? > > On 4/26/2015 5:58 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > I could justify declaring such traffic an attack and blocking the source > as malicious. > > *From:* George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting) > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','geo...@cbcast.com');> > *Sent:* Sunday, April 26, 2015 4:30 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com');> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 450SM sustain bucket throttle not working.. > > Yep, I see this all the time and Ken is exactly right. The Canopy QoS > works exactly as designed, the AP is definitely not delivering more than > the sustained rate, but is instead discarding the extra 50%. I've tested > this situation thoroughly. Stick a MT simple queue in at the upstream > router and the 2X rate traffic stops hitting the AP's ethernet interface, > but it's still coming in at double the sustained rate farther upstream. > There's no way around it except throwing bandwidth at it. > > This is CDN traffic. And when the customer thinks they can install one of > those "internet download managers" to speed up their connection. The only > thing it does is screw with TCP acks or window sizes or something which > just puts more traffic on your transit just to be discarded at the > congestion point (SM, queue, Procera, whatever). Gotta love it. > > You'd think with 70% of the internets being streaming video they'd think > hmm.. maybe we can cut down on the peering congestion by NOT doing this > crap. But no. > > On 4/26/2015 11:01 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > Sorry to answer a question with a question, but are you measuring at the > SM, or at some upstream router? > > The reason I ask, is I have seen some CDN traffic that does not seem to > follow traditional TCP congestion control. It will send at twice the rate > limit, causing 50% packet loss to its own traffic and everything else to > that same subscriber. Evidently some TCP geniuses have decided to use > latency rather than packet loss as the indicator of congestion, and that > the objective is goodput not throughput. Works for last mile technologies > like T1 and DSL with big buffers at the head end of the fixed speed serial > connection, not so good with the type of rate limit queues we tend to use > unless we can provision the queues with big buffers. > > Probably not your problem, but I thought I’d bring it up just in case. > > *From:* Kurt Fankhauser > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','li...@wavelinc.com');> > *Sent:* Sunday, April 26, 2015 10:50 AM > *To:* af@afmug.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com');> > *Subject:* [AFMUG] 450SM sustain bucket throttle not working.. > > I have a 450 SM that is rate limited in the SM to 1500kbps download on > the sustain side. I noticed last night that this customer was pulling a > steady almost 3mbps download for several hours on end. How is this > possible? Is there a problem with 13.2 firmware? Its a 3.65ghz SM. > > see attached. > > Kurt Fankhauser > > Wavelinc Communications > > P.O. Box 126 > > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > > http://www.wavelinc.com > > tel. 419-562-6405 > > fax. 419-617-0110 > > > > > -- >
