Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 243 posts

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#221

Post by monocasa »

nitrogen wrote: post #220
monocasa wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TPMs are pretty slow; the LPC bus they sit off of is basically run at ISA bus speeds.

Maybe they used TPM when they meant HSM

Even then, it's probably too high of latency. These Netflix caching boxes are perennially the subject of "this is how you TLS at line rate and memory bandwidth limits" talks. When you combine this with the fact that these boxes aren't just installed anywhere, but deep inside ISP networks, and ostenisbly the certs aren't for *.netflix.com, but instead for either that specific ISP or even that specifc box, _and_ the certs need to be remotely updated anyway, so they can't just live in an HSM the whole time, I'd just store them on disk if I were Netflix.

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#222

Post by dzonga »

tw04 wrote: post #101
pocketarc wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really is wild. ISPs have been overselling "unlimited" connections for forever, and being paid for it, but when their customers actually want to use literally the service they paid for, _legally_, it's somehow wrong? I guess that's the thing with Netflix though, it's torrent-like traffic, but legal, so there's no excuse to stop it and they have to come up with something. "oh they're generating explosive traffic th…

The thing that's most ridiculous about this is that the bandwidth is essentially "free" for SK telecom. They sit a netflix caching server in their network and the traffic never leaves. Other than the cost of switch ports (which are dirt cheap relatively speaking) they have absolutely 0 overhead beyond power and cooling for the netflix box which again with their user count is a rounding error. I'm not sure if the lawm…

it's SK, so there's a probably an element that the law-makers are paid for. SK is notorious for sending its past presidents to jail for corruption cases. but yeah with that netflix redbox, traffic shouldn't be taxin' the telco's pockets hard.

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#223

Post by tomtimtall »

xwdv wrote: post #16
fuzzy2 wrote: post #4

Everyone pays for their internet access, so why should Netflix (or anyone else) suddenly pay for mine? Netflix isn’t pushing data, I’m pulling it. If my ISP is losing money then I guess they better raise their prices, no?

Hmm, I guess ISPs could just drop traffic if they can’t afford it, but maybe if you push a lot of data you could pay more to have the content actually delivered to end users.

I’d be ok with then charging a significantly lower for a “limited bandwidth” connection. But I bought an unlimited, so they have no right to complain.

Imagine if the same principles were used in other areas. You iPhone suddenly locking up after using Facebook to much because Facebook wasn’t paying Apple for access to its users.

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#224

Post by soneil »

monocasa wrote: post #221
nitrogen wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they used TPM when they meant HSM

Even then, it's probably too high of latency. These Netflix caching boxes are perennially the subject of "this is how you TLS at line rate and memory bandwidth limits" talks. When you combine this with the fact that these boxes aren't just installed anywhere, but deep inside ISP networks, and ostenisbly the certs aren't for *.netflix.com, but instead for either that specific ISP or even that specifc box, _and_ the ce…

Wouldn’t HSM only be needed for the private key though? Once it’s in memory it’s free

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#225

Post by yumraj »

wccrawford wrote: post #15
codetrotter wrote: post #5

> Netflix said it will review SK Broadband's claim, and seek dialogue and explore ways in the meantime to work with SK Broadband to ensure customers are not affected. In other words, they will ship some Open Connect Appliance boxes to the ISP. https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/ And that’s nice for everyone. Some think it’s unfair that big players like Netflix can do so. But I think them doing that is far far better…

I just realized: By this same logic, end-users should be paid by advertisers for the bandwidth they were forced to consume for their ads. I bet that wouldn't go over nearly as well as this.

That is indeed an interesting point, especially for users who have metered Internet service.

Consider a user with a data cap of 1000GB, is metered as consuming say 1200GB of data, of which 200GB is Ads. The user is forced to pay extra for the 200GB to the ISP which the user should not have had to pay if there were no Ads.

Ignoring that ISPs should not meter the service, the above just doesn't seem right. The individual Internet services may be subsidized by Ads, but the user is paying to the ISP. So, in effect a user is paying, just to a different party.

Some lawyer should definitely look into it and see if there is potential for a class-action against Ad vendors.

Edit: I'm sure the flip argument would be that the user requested the Internet services that came with the Ad, so in effect the user is responsible for consuming the data. But that is where I think it becomes interesting and given that IMNAL I don't know what the legal minds think.

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#226

Post by [deleted] »

mcspiff wrote: post #193
tw04 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that's most ridiculous about this is that the bandwidth is essentially "free" for SK telecom. They sit a netflix caching server in their network and the traffic never leaves. Other than the cost of switch ports (which are dirt cheap relatively speaking) they have absolutely 0 overhead beyond power and cooling for the netflix box which again with their user count is a rounding error. I'm not sure if the lawm…

You’re assuming the over subscription is only occurring on the transit / peering side and not the last mile. I’m not so sure that’s entirely true.

[deleted]

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#227

Post by int_19h »

xattt wrote: post #166
lostcolony wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I am surprised that ISPs haven’t started cracking down on WfH", "Public uproar would be immense." You listed the reason why yourself, you shouldn't be surprised. Maybe -after- the pandemic, when WfH people can be painted as "tech elite" or something, but not while everyone wants to WfH and it's a mixed bag who can.

I do recognize the cognitive dissonance of my statement. I am just surprised at the restraint that ISPs have shown.

In the current climate, it would only invite government scrutiny and regulation. Which, once it is in place, is unlikely to go away even if COVID does.

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#228

Post by monocasa »

soneil wrote: post #224
monocasa wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even then, it's probably too high of latency. These Netflix caching boxes are perennially the subject of "this is how you TLS at line rate and memory bandwidth limits" talks. When you combine this with the fact that these boxes aren't just installed anywhere, but deep inside ISP networks, and ostenisbly the certs aren't for *.netflix.com, but instead for either that specific ISP or even that specifc box, _and_ the ce…

Wouldn’t HSM only be needed for the private key though? Once it’s in memory it’s free

And you need the private key for every new TLS connection. And when you are running multiple 100Gb interfaces, that's a lot of TLS connections.

Versus, what's the attack? The ISP with physical access to the box can pull can screw with the cached video data somehow? Or MitM and know what Netflix videos their users are watching?

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#229

Post by int_19h »

criddell wrote: post #191
drKarl wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, data caps was something common a few years ago...

I have a Google Fi phone and the data isn't capped, but it's $10 / GB.

Not quite. They have a soft 15 Gb cap, past which they throttle you down significantly but also don't charge you. And then it's $10 / Gb if you want to extend that cap.

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge from 'Squid Game'

#230

Post by pasabagi »

dzonga wrote: post #222
tw04 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that's most ridiculous about this is that the bandwidth is essentially "free" for SK telecom. They sit a netflix caching server in their network and the traffic never leaves. Other than the cost of switch ports (which are dirt cheap relatively speaking) they have absolutely 0 overhead beyond power and cooling for the netflix box which again with their user count is a rounding error. I'm not sure if the lawm…

it's SK, so there's a probably an element that the law-makers are paid for. SK is notorious for sending its past presidents to jail for corruption cases. but yeah with that netflix redbox, traffic shouldn't be taxin' the telco's pockets hard.

Is that actually because SK is corrupt, or because SK is really keen on rectitude in politicians? I think there are more than a few UK politicians who could definitely serve time for corruption, and it's even been occasionally (recently the health secretary) bourne out in court, but it's rarely even a political issue, let alone a criminal one.

Also, the less said about SK's neighbors (Japan, for instance) the better.

Post reply on HN