Re: Binge On! - get your umbrellas out, stuff's hitting the fan.
Ugh, I had to deal with this almost daily at $large_metered_us_carrier. We have WiFi hotspots and USB modems and inevitably the customers who usually use <2GB and have plans based on that usage got slapped with huge Windows 10 overages. Explaining that no, your "geebee" meter isn't broken, Microsoft just shafted you got so tiring, especially when they don't have the faintest clue what Windows Update or data or anything of the sort mean, just barely enough to sign into their AOL account and check the weather. The bad part is how aggressively Microsoft is downloading it to your HD even if you don't accept it. (See Windows.BT folder, &c) I am "eagerly" awaiting the next wave of update renaming/repushing.
On Jan 9, 2016 2:57 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jan 2016 11:12:16 -0600, Mike Hammett said:
Bytes uploaded and\or downloaded. That's all that should matter.
Initiated by
you or not.
You want to be the one explaining to your customer that the reason they got charged for 20G of unexpected transfer was because their 3 Windows 8 machines each downloaded Windows 10 without telling them?
For the sake of security of all internet connected hosts - especially in this new era of even more IOT junk , security updates, firmware and new OS updates should be granted libre data rates so that users who keep their devices updated are not penalised. as for carriers pipes...will, if multicast was seriously taken up then eg OS updates could be streamed out on regular updates alan
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Alan Buxey <A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
For the sake of security of all internet connected hosts - especially in this new era of even more IOT junk , security updates, firmware and new OS updates should be granted libre data rates so that users who keep their devices updated are not penalised.
so, just for the sake of the discussion, how would you do this? Keep in mind that you probably can't (as a carrier) prefer one 'os' over another, and you will likely have to deal with everything from Windows to gentoo and all the tiny raspbian/etc in the middle. How would a carrier identify and track over time the sources of this traffic? (note that a 'registry of update sources' probably also won't fly)
as for carriers pipes...will, if multicast was seriously taken up then eg OS updates could be streamed out on regular updates
multicast, yes, of course. So... it hasn't worked yet in the last ~20 yrs of the internet, it'll work now because?
On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:04:13 +0000, Alan Buxey said:
as for carriers pipes...will, if multicast was seriously taken up then eg OS updates could be streamed out on regular updates
You can multicast the Super Bowl, because to a rather high rate of accuracy you can assume that everybody who wants to watch the Super Bowl in real time is tuned in and catching the stream. It doesn't work as well for software updates, because while I know I'm in a "No cellular coverage" area hiking the south side of Mt Rogers during the Super Bowl, and I don't care because I'm no a big pro football fan, my cell phone may care if it misses an update because of it. Actually - it probably *won't*, because I'll likely be hiking long enough that my phone will *never notice* that it missed an update. So now you need to find a way to make *reverse* multicast work, so that the update server doesn't get pounded with several million requests once an hour asking "Did I miss an update?:
as for carriers pipes...will, if multicast was seriously taken up then eg OS updates could be streamed out on regular updates
Given that a lot of these updates are happening in the background without any interaction with the users, I'd think they'd be ideal for network-un-neutral traffic shaping, throttle them when people are doing something else, open them up at 3 AM. In a more reasonable world, I agree that multicasting Windows Update would make sense, but that would require a whole lot of agreements from people who aren't inclined to agree. Also remember that multicasting only gets you so far, and I would be surprised if you could multicast over the wireless last mile more efficiently than unicasting. R's, John
as for carriers pipes...will, if multicast was seriously taken up then eg OS updates could be streamed out on regular updates
Given that a lot of these updates are happening in the background without any interaction with the users
maybe for your customers, but not so true for our user base or others with which i have experience. wise folk want control of patching. and it's not only IT departments, but end users. cheeringly, even end users are becoming more cautious, at least those who have survived :) otoh, smart devices may tilt this over time. the security aspects of this are an amusing and horrifying subject of discussion in the opsec and other communities. randy
John Doe end user doesn't even know what updating is, much less wants to control it.... or even do it. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com> To: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Cc: "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2016 4:54:34 PM Subject: Re: Binge On! - get your umbrellas out, stuff's hitting the fan.
as for carriers pipes...will, if multicast was seriously taken up then eg OS updates could be streamed out on regular updates
Given that a lot of these updates are happening in the background without any interaction with the users
maybe for your customers, but not so true for our user base or others with which i have experience. wise folk want control of patching. and it's not only IT departments, but end users. cheeringly, even end users are becoming more cautious, at least those who have survived :) otoh, smart devices may tilt this over time. the security aspects of this are an amusing and horrifying subject of discussion in the opsec and other communities. randy
Given that a lot of these updates are happening in the background without any interaction with the users
maybe for your customers, but not so true for our user base or others with which i have experience. wise folk want control of patching. and it's not only IT departments, but end users.
The Windows 10 stuff generally downloads in the background, then it pops up and tells you how wonderful it is. Most of the end users I know have Windows Update set to do its thing automatically, and even if it's not installed automatically it'll often download and then ask whether you want to install it.
otoh, smart devices may tilt this over time. the security aspects of this are an amusing and horrifying subject of discussion in the opsec and other communities.
No kidding. R's, John
participants (8)
-
Alan Buxey -
Alex Buie -
Christopher Morrow -
John Levine -
John R. Levine
-
Mike Hammett -
Randy Bush -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu