dslreports logo
site
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search Topic:
uniqs
5099
share rss forum feed


MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY
reply to swintec

Re: [OOL] is punishing encrypted YouTube straems at prime time?

said by swintec:

have you eliminated any variables between your connnection and your workplace?

What variables between my connection and my work?
said by swintec:

does business class ool have qos over residential connections on the network?

I do not know if business class ool have qos. I don't see how that relates to this issue.

is your business network set up to use different dns servers than your home network?

no. my local computer uses the same Google dns 8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4 servers regardless if it's connected to vpn or not.

since youtube routes you via your dns location this could alter things completely.

"dns location" only matter when you are talking about east coast vs west coast. not when picking within the same region.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]


MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY
reply to cablewizzard

said by cablewizzard:

What were the Google CDN IPs you were actually receiving the streams from?

While connected directly to OOL I was downloading video from 173.194.61.19
C:\Users\user>tracert 173.194.61.19

Tracing route to 173.194.61.19 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 8 ms 25 ms 12 ms 10.240.160.213
3 8 ms 14 ms 8 ms 67.59.228.93
4 11 ms 10 ms 26 ms r4-ge1-1-2.mhe.hcvlny.cv.net [67.83.220.133]
5 15 ms 22 ms 10 ms 64.15.5.205
6 15 ms 8 ms 11 ms 451be095.cst.lightpath.net [65.19.120.149]
7 85 ms 82 ms 74 ms 72.14.211.49
8 15 ms 9 ms 12 ms 72.14.239.248
9 78 ms 68 ms 61 ms 72.14.238.233
10 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 216.239.43.158
11 10 ms 8 ms 13 ms 173.194.61.19

Trace complete.


While connected to work VPN I was downloading video from 173.194.43.41

C:\Users\user>tracert 173.194.43.41

Tracing route to lga15s35-in-f9.1e100.net [173.194.43.41] over a maximum of 30 hops:

1-3 is our network
4 164 ms 204 ms 353 ms mdf016c7613r0001-tge-10-4.nyc2.attens.net [63.240.24.105]
5 12 ms 16 ms 11 ms 12.122.251.41
6 18 ms 17 ms 15 ms cr1.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.131.170]
7 123 ms 126 ms 64 ms gar1.chsct.ip.att.net [12.122.105.57]
8 19 ms 31 ms 17 ms 12.249.88.6
9 12 ms 14 ms 12 ms 72.14.239.248
10 13 ms 13 ms 15 ms 72.14.237.254
11 11 ms 14 ms 11 ms lga15s35-in-f9.1e100.net [173.194.43.41]

Trace complete.


Pretty much identical results.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]


swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS

said by MxxCon:

Pretty much identical results.

Except they appear to be completely different routes, except maybe one common hop between the two of them?

Whats identical? The response times?
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts


MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

They are very similar if you look outside of CV/ATT network.
Obviously you will not get absolutely exactly the same traceroutes if you do it twice. Google, like any other properly configured network has multiple routes to the same destination. Your packets are bound to travel through different devices.
And yes, latency is also very similar, especially considering VPN's traceroute is OOL+AT&T networks.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]


cablewizzard

join:2009-06-14
Hicksville, NY
kudos:1

2 recommendations

reply to MxxCon

said by MxxCon:

Or maybe their snooping devices can't keep up at peak time..They are fruitlessly trying to analyze/decrypt it and this is how fast they can go when overloaded.
Are you saying CV doesn't use these?

Yet, I'm asking if anybody else noticed this pattern...

This is just pure, utter conspiracy hogwash.

Snooping devices may sit in a traffic path - but they sure as hell COPY the bitstream, they do NOT under any circumstances delay packets via COPY, PROCESS and REINSERT. First rule of legal (and not-so-legal) interception: don't get noticed.
Pay attention to your Narus deployment guide, dude.

I am reasonably sure I know the answer to this entire thread, but nothing I can say would change your mind.


MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

said by cablewizzard:

I am reasonably sure I know the answer to this entire thread, but nothing I can say would change your mind.

then please stay out of this thread.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]


mbernste
Boosted
Premium,MVM
join:2001-06-30
Piscataway, NJ
reply to cablewizzard

I agree with cablewizzard See Profile in that this is pure conspiracy hogwash. The OP is paranoid and when anyone tries to reasonably dissuade them, they attack the individual with insults.



MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Once again, if you feel that way, please stay out of this thread. You are not helping this issue.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]



Uhmbut

@optonline.net

Maybe there really isn't an issue? At least with Cablevision. I'm pretty sure you don't have enough information to place the blame on CV "throttling" YouTube.



MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

So how do you explain that 100% of the time when I load videos directly from CV it's slow, and 100% of the time when I load videos over VPN in NYC it's fast? 100% of the time, without a single miss ever Google redirects CV to a slow datacenter and 100% of the time without a single miss Google redirects my VPN connection to an underutilized datacenter? Regardless if I use Google DNS or OpenDNS.

So do explain that to me.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]



MrAnonnnn

@optonline.net

MaxxCon, You do have a point in what you are saying, but it is falling on deaf ears, They will try to shoot you down if try to open that can of worms!



andvari

join:2003-05-21
Freehold, NJ
reply to MxxCon

I do not have problems with You Tube from NJ.

In these situations incompetence is a far more likely reason than malice. Especially since OOL in NY is involved.



MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

You do not have problem with YouTube or SSL'ed YouTube? Regular YouTube works fine for me too.
Incompetence on whose part?
My OOL connection otherwise is perfectly consistent. 24/7 I get steady 18mbit, even during peak hours when youtube is slow.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]



swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS

said by MxxCon:

You do not have problem with YouTube or SSL'ed YouTube? Regular YouTube works fine for me too.

does you tube even default to non ssl in browsers? if not i would think ssl would be the norm not the exception.

do you connect to the same when you try non ssl versus ssl when on your ool connection?
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts


MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Yes. Exactly the same video.



swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS

said by MxxCon:

Yes. Exactly the same video.

Sorry I meant do you connect to 173.194.61.19 for SSL and non SSL?
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts


MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

I did not think to compare those.


majortom1029

join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
kudos:1
reply to MxxCon

MXXCON your being very rude. Cablewizzard told you exactly why it wouldn't be cablevision doing it and you told him to stay out of the thread.

I am in Huntington long island and https works perfectly fine here. We are using opendns for dns.



MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

His modi operandi is to blame anybody and everything but CV, he does it every single time there's any issue with CV.
His excuse that YouTube is incompetent at running CDNs is bullshit! The largest streaming site on the internet has a lot more experience running their CDN over the last 2 years that whatever his most qualified skill is.
Considering Google said they are not performing ssl termination on the central loadbalancers but pass it to back-end web servers, no way in hell would they not have enough processing capacity to handle all that traffic.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]



MrAnonnn

@optonline.net
reply to majortom1029

My opinion is he not being rude, He has a right to ask someone if they do not agree to stay out of if. Some people thing they can rule the thread. What they say is 100% correct. Not away true. Sometimes it is a diversions away from an issue.



AlexNYC

join:2001-06-02
Edwards, CO

1 recommendation

reply to MxxCon

https should be used everywhere all the time as much as possible by everyone. If you have to ask "why" you have no idea how dark and scary the digital world we live in actually is. Just look at the WAN logs on your home router for a perspective.



AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ
kudos:1
reply to MxxCon

said by MxxCon:

no way in hell would they not have enough processing capacity to handle all that traffic.

and yet you are having problems.
--
* seek help if having trouble coping
--Standard disclaimers apply.--


MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

said by AVD:

said by MxxCon:

no way in hell would they not have enough processing capacity to handle all that traffic.

and yet you are having problems.

So far with facts showing that CV is at fault.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]

majortom1029

join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
kudos:1

said by MxxCon:

said by AVD:

said by MxxCon:

no way in hell would they not have enough processing capacity to handle all that traffic.

and yet you are having problems.

So far with facts showing that CV is at fault.

How is it Fact when your the only one having the problem? Here in Medford at home and at work in Huntington and Huntington station I am having no problems with loading youtube videos with https.

dm145

join:2009-12-12
Clifton, NJ
Reviews:
·Optimum Online

said by majortom1029:

How is it Fact when your the only one having the problem? Here in Medford at home and at work in Huntington and Huntington station I am having no problems with loading youtube videos with https.

Nor am I

SniperCS

join:2005-09-11
Lawrence, NY

I'm not having any of these problems either in your described "peak hours". I tested it multiple days, and no issues loading anything in HTTPS up to 1080p.

I have the 50/8 plan and everything working fine... I really think this is an issue on your end and nothing to do with CV. But believe what you'd like, I don't understand why they would block just you from accessing YouTube at full speeds on the HTTPS protocol.

You must wear some sort of tin foil hats all the time or something.



MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

said by SniperCS:

I really think this is an issue on your end and nothing to do with CV.

How is this an issue on my end if during offpeak hours and on VPN youtube works perfectly? If it was a local problem, I'd be exhibiting it all the time.
said by SniperCS:

You must wear some sort of tin foil hats all the time or something.

or something.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]


wsudelt
Premium
join:2002-12-03
New Canaan, CT
reply to MxxCon

If by "nation security letter" you mean National Security Letter (NSL), you are incorrect as NSLs do not allow for "content" let alone intercepts - the latter of which requires a Title 3 (T3) or FISA.

As such, for any provider to intercept and decrypt packets or any other data w/out either of the above would in fact, be illegal.



wsudelt
Premium
join:2002-12-03
New Canaan, CT
reply to MxxCon

Incorrect. NSLs do not "override" the requirement of a T3 or FISA intercept (or search warrant).



kdshapiro

join:2000-03-29
Eatontown, NJ
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
reply to MxxCon

For what it's worth, I never tried to connect to youtube with https. But due to this thread, I did and have been connecting at different times to see if I could notice a difference between https and http at the highest resolution.

I couldn't.
--
Ken