On 2/20/2020 10:34 AM, Ca By wrote:

On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:19 AM Blake Hudson <blake@ispn.net> wrote:

Your comments seem to differentiate IP4 vs IP6, but I don't believe that
is relevant to the issue of an ISP throttling or breaking specific
applications. If you have evidence that UDP on IP4 is treated
differently than UDP on IP6 by your provider, without further
information I would suspect that this is simply an unintentional over
sight on their part.


This is your misunderstanding. The protections are to drop ipv4 udp because that is where the ddos / iot trash is , not v6.... for now


Perhaps the attention you've generated on this topic, along with the
adoption of additional UDP based applications like QUIC, will encourage
ISPs to treat UDP in a more neutral manner and not simply see UDP as
something that is "bad".

Dropping udp is not from a “best practice” doc from a vendor, it is deployed by network ops folks that are trying to sleep at night. 


I get it Ca, I happen to be one of those network ops folks that likes to sleep at night. However, I've never thought it was a good practice to break applications in fun ways for my customers to discover on their own and I've never sold someone a 150Mbps package that actually only delivers 10Mbps for certain applications. Regardless of the intent, ATT and Cox's policies are not transparent, open, or neutral on this topic. This leaves us to speculate on what their intentions might have been and whether their actions are an appropriate response to any concerns they might have had.