nanog mailing list archives

Re: Soooo..... Netflix


From: Innocent Obi <innocent.obijr () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 09:08:35 -0800

Something that would be interesting to see (particularly if someone has
eyes in Comcast’s network) is to see how customers in areas where L4S
trials are happening faired in comparison to others.

Part of the narrative of what we are seeing in the CDN market i.e., some
not necessarily being prepared for a streaming era.


On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 9:03 AM <joel () joelesler net> wrote:

Also, how far have we come that 65 MILLION streams were active at the same
time and we’re like “omg, so bad!”

5 years ago, never possible.

That being said.  I watched it on my iPad with *no problems whatsoever*.
Not even one hiccup.  Meanwhile I had X open in a side by side and I saw
people complaining about it.


On Nov 18, 2024, at 09:08, Cooke, David via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:

This email may contain proprietary information of BAE Systems and/or third
parties.

My experience over a home internet fiber connection wasn’t great (like
everyone else’s) but my son was watching it over his mobile device without
any issues.

*From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces+david.cooke=baesystemsdetica.com () nanog org> *On
Behalf Of *Tom Beecher
*Sent:* Monday, November 18, 2024 12:23 AM
*To:* Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>
*Cc:* NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
*Subject:* Re: Soooo..... Netflix


*PHISHING ALERT*
*This email has been sent from an account outside of the BAE Systems
network.*

Be aware that this could be a phishing attempt. For more guidance, search
"phishing email" on Connect. If you think this is a phishing email report
it using the "PhishMe" button on Outlook.



What were your educated observations, preferably with supporting data?


If it was capacity issues, they learned a hard lesson that you should have
other CDNs available to shed traffic over to if yours hits a problem that
can't be quickly solved in real time.

If it was server/software/livestream technical , then /shrug. Fix those.
:)


On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 1:28 PM Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote:

Armchair quarterbacking...

Discussions I've seen from operators on Facebook shows some that had PNIs
that worked just fine, while others with PNIs and cache boxes didn't fare
so well. Some with just cache boxes were fine, while others were not.

What were your educated observations, preferably with supporting data?

Did we have a problem with congestion where the cache boxes phones home
to, and this they just fell over?

AWS used to be the data source of last resort. Did anyone notice
congestion going from AWS to cache boxes?




-----Mike HammettIntelligent Computing SolutionsMidwest Internet
ExchangeThe Brothers WISP

BAE Systems will collect and process information about you that may be
subject to data protection laws. For more information about how we use and
disclose your personal information, how we protect your information, our
legal basis to use your information, your rights and who you can contact,
please refer to the relevant sections of our Privacy note at
www.baesystems.com/en/cybersecurity/privacy

Please consider the environment before printing this email. This message
should be regarded as confidential. If you have received this email in
error please notify the sender and destroy it immediately. Statements of
intent shall only become binding when confirmed in hard copy by an
authorised signatory. The contents of this email may relate to dealings
with other companies under the control of BAE Systems PLC, details of which
can be found at http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/index.htm.




Current thread: