Re: CDN Overload?

[Martin Hannigan <hannigan () gmail com>]

No problem.

If you can drop a pcap file somewhere we can reach (and drop me an email where) that was created during the event 
that'd be great.

Thanks again, and great use of the list. 

Best,

Martin Hannigan
AS 20940 // AS 32787


> On Sep 21, 2016, at 15:29, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote:
>
> Thanks Marty. I have only experienced this on my network once and it was directly with Microsoft, so I haven't done 
> much until a couple days ago when I started this campaign. I don't know if anyone else has brought this to anyone's 
> attention. I just sent an e-mail to Owen when I saw yours.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
>
> The Brothers WISP
>
> From: "Martin Hannigan" <hannigan () gmail com>
> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog () ics-il net>
> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog () nanog org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 8:19:35 PM
> Subject: Re: CDN Overload?
>
>
> Mike,
>
> I will forward to the requisite group for a look. Have you brought this to our attention previously? I don't see 
> anything. If you did, please forward me the ticket numbers or message(s) (peering@ is best) so wee can track down and 
> see if someone already has it in queue.
>
> Jared alluded to fasttcp a few emails ago. Astute man.
>
> Best,
>
> Martin Hannigan 
> AS 20940 // AS 32787
>
>
>
> On Sep 21, 2016, at 14:30, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote:
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Jdm0dOBf81kSnXEvVfI6ZJbWFNt5AbYUV8CDxGwLSm8/edit?usp=sharing 
>
> I have made the anonymized answers public. This will obviously have some bias to it given that I mostly know fixed 
> wireless operators, but I'm hoping this gets some good distribution to catch more platforms. 
>
>
>
>
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>
> The Brothers WISP 
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Mike Hammett" <nanog () ics-il net> 
> To: "NANOG" <nanog () nanog org> 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 9:08:55 AM 
> Subject: Re: CDN Overload? 
>
> https://goo.gl/forms/LvgFRsMdNdI8E9HF3 
>
> I have made this into a Google Form to make it easier to track compared to randomly formatted responses on multiple 
> mailing lists, Facebook Groups, etc. 
>
>
>
>
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>
> The Brothers WISP 
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>
> From: "Mike Hammett" <nanog () ics-il net> 
> To: "NANOG" <nanog () nanog org> 
> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 12:34:48 PM 
> Subject: CDN Overload? 
>
>
> I participate on a few other mailing lists focused on eyeball networks. For a couple years I've been hearing 
> complaints from this CDN or that CDN was behaving badly. It's been severely ramping up the past few months. There 
> have been some wild allegations, but I would like to develop a bit more standardized evidence collection. Initially 
> LimeLight was the only culprit, but recently it has been Microsoft as well. I'm not sure if there have been any 
> others. 
>
> The principal complaint is that upstream of whatever is doing the rate limiting for a given customer there is 
> significantly more capacity being utilized than the customer has purchased. This could happen briefly as TCP adjusts 
> to the capacity limitation, but in some situations this has persisted for days at a time. I'll list out a few 
> situations as best as I can recall them. Some of these may even be merges of a couple situations. The point is to 
> show the general issue and develop a better process for collecting what exactly is happening at the time and how to 
> address it. 
>
> One situation had approximately 45 megabit/s of capacity being used up by a customer that had a 1.5 megabit/s plan. 
> All other traffic normally held itself within the 1.5 megabit/s, but this particular CDN sent excessively more for 
> extended periods of time. 
>
> An often occurrence has someone with a single digit megabit/s limitation consuming 2x - 3x more than their plan on 
> the other side of the rate limiter. 
>
> Last month on my own network I saw someone with 2x - 3x being consumed upstream and they had *190* connections 
> downloading said data from Microsoft. 
>
> The past week or two I've been hearing of people only having a single connection downloading at more than their plan 
> rate. 
>
>
> These situations effectively shut out all other Internet traffic to that customer or even portion of the network for 
> low capacity NLOS areas. It's a DoS caused by downloads. What happened to the days of MS BITS and you didn't even 
> notice the download happening? A lot of these guys think that the CDNs are just a pile of dicks looking to ruin 
> everyone's day and I'm certain that there are at least a couple people at each CDN that aren't that way. ;-) 
>
>
>
>
> Lots of rambling, sure. What do I need to have these guys collect as evidence of a problem and who should they send 
> it to? 
>
>
>
>
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>
> The Brothers WISP