241–250 of 305 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh, just revert back to pirating. That’s what I do whenever things don’t work.
From the above thread it looks as if piracy might actually be a more bandwidth economical option than streaming services. Spread the load of the bandwidth around a bit more. Download any time other than peak streaming hours to then watch, self-contained, during peak streaming hours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Said the other way around: fast.com is great to see actual throughput from Netflix as opposed to some fake throughout from a dedicated speed test site for the exact same reason. Yup. This is pretty much the reason Netflix created fast.com. They wanted a speed test service that couldn’t be gamed by ISPs. Many ISPs will prioritise traffic to know speed test services (like Ookla’s speedtest.net), making their services…
Couldn't ISPs just sniff the SNI hostname to differentiate fast.com vs actual Netflix video streaming?
When I had AT&T VDSL they had weak peering. Some traffic that should have gone across town would routinely get routed several states away before coming back to town, because they hadn't peered with the local exchanges. Some traffic was ok. When I switched to an ISP with local peering, ping times between my home and my server downtown dropped to a few milliseconds. It's like being on my LAN. If this is still an issue…
Same issue in Canada: our big ISPs historically refuse to peer freely at our domestic IXs like TORIX. So smaller ISP and DCs end up peering with them in the USA and your packets would make circuitous cross-border round trips to go a few km. Some national players do have ports at domestic IXs, but only as backup links or for negotiated (paid?) access. The hazards of ISPs also being backbone providers. (It looks like R…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same issue in Canada: our big ISPs historically refuse to peer freely at our domestic IXs like TORIX. So smaller ISP and DCs end up peering with them in the USA and your packets would make circuitous cross-border round trips to go a few km. Some national players do have ports at domestic IXs, but only as backup links or for negotiated (paid?) access. The hazards of ISPs also being backbone providers. (It looks like R…
As far as I can tell, Bell holds its Canadian customers hostage to force peers to pay them for what should be mutually beneficial peering. It does not participate in _ANY_ of the Canadian internet exchanges. Even Rogers connects to TORIX. https://bgp.he.net/AS577#_ix
This is no different than me approaching Verizon or at&t and demanding they peer with me.
Fun story: I work remotely for an org located in the Bay area. Few months ago I get a call early morning from the IT security person. Apparently someone had been trying to RDP into my work laptop, over a thousand attempts per day for last couple of days. What changed before the last couple of days? My laptop was frequently dropping WiFi connection- a lot of times in the middle of zoom meetings. We use a router provid…
"yeah... we're gonna have to go ahead and reconfigure your home to operate in passthrough mode. This is going to require techs onsite so we went ahead and deployed some generic subcontractors. What they have to do there is, well kinda counterintuitive. They will be using brute force techniques to uninstall and didpose of ALL of your doors. So.... there's a bunch of little wireless packet things, like the kind use for 5G, or the other 5G, flying around everywhere. They always bounce off things and they get lost a bunch. Now that home passthrough mode is enabled, the packets can just 'pass through' and get where they wanna be. Sometimes other things, like humans, or ocelots, 'pass through' too. How exciting! After all, at ATT no one gives a ** if all kinds of critters go through your crap whenever we 'fix' something. "
When your ISP screws up your router settings: 1) It's highly likely you won't be aware there's a major security problem with your network. 2) potential attackers include, but are not limited to, massive numbers of ill-intentioned, yet impossible to identify, individuals quckly become aware there's a major security problem with your network.
When your ISP performs a literal brute force attack on your domicile, leaving you completely doorless: 1) You KNOW, 100%, that there's a major security problem. Your doors are gone. No doors. The physical equivalent of a router in passthrough mode. 2) Potential attackers are within a relatively limited geographic area, with numerous ways to learn more. They've likely noticed that things in your home life have been a bit weird.
What are you using for your DNS resolver?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's definitely odd that you're getting routed across the country to an east coast pop. Ideally in your location you'd be routed to a west or central pop. Perhaps a bad combination of Cloudfront getting geolocation wrong for your IP range, and poor performance of at&t's network for that specific source-destination combination.
I found that odd as well, and my iPhone hotspot does get routed through a different list of hosts as you can see in the traceroute. I suppose it should be noted. The iphone antenna and router antennas are no more than a meter from each other. They're unlikely to be hitting different towers.
Deactivate priority for Zoom, and now I have full speed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
99% of consumer traffic is on 443 these days (citation needed)
HTTP3 uses UDP and doesn’t have to use the same port, although I presume it does. “A browser first connects the server with HTTP/2 To discover the service. The server responses with an Alt-Svc header, including the port for HTTP/3, such as Alt-Svc: h3-29=":443"”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the above thread it looks as if piracy might actually be a more bandwidth economical option than streaming services. Spread the load of the bandwidth around a bit more. Download any time other than peak streaming hours to then watch, self-contained, during peak streaming hours.
Plus you can rewatch without downloading again. And use sneakernets for sharing with your friends.
Thinking about it, it seems like watching habits could make streaming be more or less "efficient" compared to downloading once and storing it locally (depends on how one chooses to calculate efficiency tbh).
People that have things they regularly re-watch are obviously gonna benefit from having a local copy they can access entirely on their own terms.
It hadn't occurred to me until recently, but the way I watch stuff has me going through a pretty large amount of data yet I'm also excessively unlikely I re-watch nearly anything that I've seen in the previous 2 years. Whether something is streamed or stored local, it has to be downloaded the first time it's watched. If it'll take 2 years before I re-watch something, it's a waste of time and money to keep a backlog of multiple disks worth of video