nanog mailing list archives

Re: netflix proxy/unblocker false detection


From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 06:35:58 -0700

I take his statement more as:

        “If Netflix wasn’t doing IPv6, they’d be in more of a corner
        to resolve CGNAT issues. Since they support IPv6, likely their
        response to CGNAT issues is ``Press your provider to do IPv6,
        it’s better.’’”

Likely, that is true. Support for IPv6 isn’t at fault here. Rather, the
reality that IPv6 is a relatively easy way to offer a much better user
experience than CGNAT is in play here.

Owen


On Jun 25, 2020, at 7:45 AM, Christian <cdel () firsthand net> wrote:

wow. blaming support for IPv6 rather than using cgnat is a huge stretch of credibility

On 25/06/2020 10:20, Mark Tinka wrote:

On 25/Jun/20 11:08, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:

Did anybody noticed that Netflix just became useless due to tons of
proxy/unblocker false detection on CGNAT ranges?
Even my home network is dual stack, i am absolutely sure there is no
proxy/vpn/whatsoever (but ipv4 part is over CGNAT) - and i got
"proxy/unblocker" message on my personal TV.
And many other ISP sysadmins told me that recently this is a massive
problem, and netflix support is frankly inadequate and does not want
to solve the problem.
I will not be surprised that they will begin to actively lose users
due to such a shameful silly screwed up algorithm.
Who in sober mind blocks all legit users due probably one or two
suspicious users behind same IP range?
This isn't a new problem - for years, services that track what a single
IP address does can deny access if something looks amiss.

Of course, CG-NAT is a reality, but perhaps Netflix find it will be
easier to lose some customers than building infrastructure and support
to work out what is valid CG-NAT vs. mischief.

Probably would have been an easier case if Netflix didn't support IPv6,
but alas...

Mark.

-- 
Christian de Larrinaga
----------------------


Current thread: