Re: Massive Price Increase for X-conns at Telehouse Chelsea, NYC
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 4:59 PM Fredy Kuenzler wrote: > Is anyone else affected by a massive price increase for x-conns by > Telehouse Chelsea? > If I recall correctly in just switching to 100G ports instead of multiple 10G bundles we managed to pay off new switches in ~6 months. (not on that specific location but prices are high).
[OT] Internet in China
Hi, Can someone suggest a reliable internet provider in China? Are all options China Telecom? Some current links we have in Shanghai are sometimes exhibiting ~40% packet loss to Japan/Singapore AWS regions which is not really acceptable. Off-list replies are welcome too. Thank you! -- *blap*
Re: Multi-CDN Strategies
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Chris Woodfield wrote: > I have some experience with this; a few things off the top of my head: > > - It’s usually best to leverage some sort of “smart” DNS to handle CNAME > distribution, giving you the ability to weight your CNAME distribution vs. > only using one CDN all the time, or prefer different CDNs in various global > regions. I’ve had decent experience with Dyn here, but Route53 has all the > features you’d want as well. If possible, write tooling towards your DNS > provider’s API to automate your failovers. > I've seen people do this in their code too, send approximate percentages of requests to different providers but then you need to do a code push for failover.
Re: PlayStationNetwork blocking of CGNAT public addresses
Something similar happened to a local FantasyConon I was helping set up, we had only two PS4 machines there and accounts provided by Blizzard for Overwatch. Outside IP of the LAN (as it was NATed) was banned by PSN in about 8h. There was no other traffic other then those two accounts playing Overwatch so my guess is that they have some too aggressive checks. I've managed to convince our ISP there to change the outside IP of the link so we got them working the next day but it happened again in 8h. -- *blap* On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Simon Lockhart wrote: > All, > > We operate an access network with several hundred thousand users. > Increasingly > we're putting the users behind CGNAT in order to continue to give them an > IPv4 > service (we're all dual-stack, so they all get public IPv6 too). Due to the > demographic of our users, many of them are gamers. > > We're hitting a problem with PlayStationNetwork 'randomly' blocking some > of our > CGNAT outside addresses, because they claim to have received anomalous, or > 'attack' traffic from that IP. This obviously causes problems for the other > legitimate users who end up behind the same public IPv4 address. > > Despite numerous attempts to engage with PSN, they are unwilling to give us > any additional information which would allow us to identify the 'rogue' > users > on our network, or to identify the 'unwanted' traffic so that we could > either > block it, or use it to identify the rogue users ourselves. > > Has anyone else come up against the problem, and/or have any suggestions on > how best to resolve it? > > Many thanks in advance, > > Simon > >
Re: Netflow parameters and data that comes from CDNs
Hi, > And in fictitious case of jf_music.com hiring Akamai, would the Akamai > server(s) have a dedicated IP for jf_music in each city (or re-use same > IP via anycast) or would the CDN servers use the same IP address to > deliver multiple services from totally different content providers ? > Generally the CDN provider would have a cluster of machines/IP's on each of their locations that are reused by different customers and are probably divided by service/content. They would probably be stable but can vary due to service improvements or disruptions. As it was noted Akamai is putting servers into the ISP's, I don't think that others like L3 or Limelight do it (or seen evidence that they do).
