Category Archives: Network

Internet. Networking.

Network, Technology

Bye bye Crystone

or, why we should give up on service providers that don’t treat us well enough.

We co-locate

We (Haxx) have a server (technically speaking we have more than one but this is about our main one that hosts most of our public stuff). This server is ours. We bought it, installed it, configured it and then we handed it over to a company that “co-locates” it for us. It means they put our hardware in their big server room and we pay them for it and for the bandwidth our server consumes.

It also means that we have less control over it and we need to call the company to get access to our machine and so on. Ok, so we’ve used Crystone for this for a long time. They’ve been cheap enough and they haven’t complained when we’ve greatly overrun our bandwidth “allowance” for many months in a row.

A bad track record

We did have concerns a while ago (August 2009 and then again in March 2010) when they had power problems in their facility and we suffered from outages and server down-times. Crystone was then really bad at communicating with what happened, what they do and we started to look around for alternative providers since it started to get annoying and they didn’t seem to care for us properly. But we didn’t really get around to actually moving and time passed.

Maybe they had fixed their flaws and things were now fine?

A Saturday in May

Suddenly, on the early morning Saturday May 22nd 2010 our machine didn’t respond to network traffic anymore. We didn’t find out until we woke up and tried to use our services and after having tried a few things. we contacted Crystone to hear if the problem was theirs or if the problem was ours – we’ve had some troubles lately with the network interface card and we feared that perhaps the network might had stopped working due to this flaky hardware.

The customer service at Crystone immediately said that they were experiencing problems due to their move of the server park to the new facilities (they moved from Liljeholmen to Hammarby, both different locations within the general Stockholm area). They said they had network problems and that they were working on it. They did not give any estimation of when our machine would be back online.

They also said that they had mailed their customers about this move, and yeah we felt a bit bad about not having noticed such a mail so that we had been prepared.

The entire day passed. No network. Their web site mentioned problems due to this particular server move. We waited, we got no further info. We were unhappy.

Saturday become Sunday

How big problems can you have when the down-time for your customers exceeds 24 hours and you still haven’t fixed it nor told us what the problems actually are? The Sunday passed and they updated their web site a few times. The last update mentioned the time 16:03 and it said “most customers” are now back online and that if there’s any remaining problem we should contact their customer service. I spotted that message a couple of hours later, when our machine still wasn’t available. And what did customer service have to say to us about it? Nothing, they were closed. Our server remained dead and inaccessible.

Monday, now beyond 50 hours

In the wee hours of the Monday we passed 50 hours offline time and when the customer service “desk” opened in the morning and answered our phone call, they could get our machine back online. By rebooting it. No explanation from their part why our machine was like the only one that suffered this long.

A search in the mail logs also proved that Crystone never mailed us to tell that our server would move. Isn’t that odd? (not really, as we would find out later)

We won’t stand it

Already during the weekend we had decided we are fed up with this complete ignorance and crappy treatment. Down-times and problems happen, but the complete lack of information and care about us – their customers – is what made it clear we are not suitable to be their customers. We had to go elsewhere.

Crystone offered us a month fee worth of deduction on the hosting charges as a compensation for the troubles we had. That was nice of them, but really this service isn’t expensive so it’s not the cost of this that is burdensome. We just can’t stand having a service this unreliable and working with a company that is this uncommunicative.

This big server move was Crystone moving a lot of equipment over to the facility that is owned and run by Phonera, another ISP, and the one that we happened to have an offer from since before when we were looking for alternatives. Handy – we thought – perhaps we could just go there and carry our server over from one shelf to another and we’ll be fine. Phonera is slightly more expensive but hey, perhaps we’d get peace of mind!

“We don’t steal customers”

Phonera was first glad to accept us as customers, but surprised us greatly when they turned around and declined getting us as new customers, since they claimed they don’t want to “steal” customers from Crystone (that are now themselves customers of Phonera). Baffled, we simply sent off another request to Portlane instead and within minutes we had a decision made and a contract signed.

Later that afternoon, a Phonera guy got back to us and had changed position again and said that perhaps we could become customers anyway. They had figured out that none of them would gain by us going to a third company, but in any case it was now too late for them and we had already made up our minds about going Portlane.

“Sir, your server is not here”

On Tuesday 13:00, Björn (as co-admin of the server) had an appointment with Crystone to extract our server from their care to take it over to its new home. When he appeared in Hammarby at the new facility to get the server he was up for (another) surprise. It wasn’t there. Now Crystone could inform us that our server is still left in the old facility in Liljeholmen. It was never moved!

Glad our business with these guys would soon be over, Björn  handed over our 1U of server to Portlane and within a short while it had found a new home, with a new IP address and a new caretaker.

We could once again take a deep breath of relief and carry on with whatever we were doing before again.

cURL and libcurl, Development, Network

curl and speced cookie order

I just posted this on the curl-library list, but I feel it suits to be mentioned here separately.

As I’ve mentioned before, I’m involved in the IETF http-state working group which is working to document how cookies are used in the wild today. The idea is to create a spec that new implementations can follow and that existing implementations can use to become more interoperable.

(If you’re interested in these matters, I can only urge you to join the http-state mailing list and participate in the discussions.)

The subject of how to order cookies in outgoing HTTP Cookie: headers have been much debated over the recent months and I’ve also blogged about it. Now, the issue has been closed and the decision went quite opposite to my standpoint and now the spec will say that while the servers SHOULD not rely on the order (yeah right, some obviously already do and with this specified like this even more will soon do the same) it will recommend clients to sort the cookies in a given way that is close to the way current Firefox does it[*].

This has the unfortunate side-effect that to become fully compatible with how the browsers do cookies, we will need to sort our cookies a bit more than what we just recently introduced. That in itself really isn’t very hard since once we introduced qsort() it is easy to sort on more/other keys.

The biggest problem we get with this, is that the sorting uses creation time of the cookies. libcurl and curl and others mostly use the Netscape cookie files to store cookies and keep state between invokes, and that file format doesn’t include creation time info! It is a simple text-based file format with TAB-separated columns and the last (7th) column is the cookie’s content.

In order to support the correct sorting between sessions, we need to invent a way to pass on the creation time. My thinking is that we do this in a way that allows older libcurls still understand the file but just not see/understand the creation time, while newer versions will be able to get it. This would be possible by extending the expires field (the 6th) as it is a numerical value that the existing code will parse as a number and it will stop at the first non-digit character. We could easily add a character separation and store the
creation time after. Like:

Old expire time:

2345678

New expire+creation time:

2345678/1234567

This format might even work with other readers of this file format if they do similar assumptions on the data, but the truth is that while we picked the format in the first place to be able to exchange cookies with a well known and well used browser, no current browser uses that format anymore. I assume there are still a bunch of other tools that do, like wget and friends.

Update: as my friend Micah Cowan explains: we can in fact use the order of the cookie file as “creation time” hint and use that as basis for sorting. Then we don’t need to modify the file format. We just need to make sure to store them in time-order… Internally we will need to keep a line number or something per cookie so that we can use that for sorting.

[*] – I believe it sorts on path length, domain length and time of creation, but as soon as the -06 draft goes online it will be easy to read the exact phrasing. The existing -05 draft exists at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpstate-cookie-05

Development, Network, Security

An FTP hash command

9 Comments

Anthony Bryan strikes again. This time his name is attached to a new standards draft for how to get a hash checksum of a given file when using the FTP protocol. draft-bryan-ftp-hash-00 was published just a few days ago.

The idea is basically to introduce a spec for a new command named ‘HASH’ that a client can issue to a server to get a hash checksum for a given file in order to know that the file has the exact same contents you want before you even start downloading it or otherwise consider it for actions.

The spec details how you can ask for different hash algorithms, how the server announces its support for this in its FEAT response etc.

I’ve already provided some initial feedback on this draft, and I’ll try to assist Anthony a bit more to get this draft pushed onwards.

Network, Security

The big protocols

1 Comment

OWASP Sweden once again arranged another interesting meeting, this time with three talks.owasp

The title of the meeting on January 21st here in Stockholm called the protocols “the big ones” (but in Swedish) but I have no idea what kind of measurement they’ve used or what the small ones are or what other “big protocols” there might be! 😉

First we got to hear HÃ¥vard Eidnes tell us about BGP and that protocol seems to suffer from its share of security problems with the protocol itself but perhaps even more with the actual implementations as one of the bigger recent BGP-related incidents that was spoken about was about how internal routes were leaked to the outside from Pakistan in Feb 2008 which made them block the entire world’s access to Youtube. This talk also gave us some insights on the “wild west” of international routing and the lack of control and proper knowledge about who’s allowed to route what to where.

There then was a session by Rickard Bellgrim about DNSSEC and even though I’ve heard talks about this protocol in the past I couldn’t but to again feel that man they have a lot of terminology in that world that makes even a basic description fairly hard to keep up with in some parts of it all. And man do they have a lot of signing and keys and fingerprints and trusts going on… Of course DNSSEC is the answer to lots of existing problems with DNS and DNSSEC certainly opens up a range of new fun. The idea to somehow replace the need for ca-certs by storing keys in DNS is interesting, but even though technically working and sound I fear the browser vendors and the CAs of the SSL world won’t be very fast to turn the wheels to roll in that direction. DNSSEC certainly makes name resolving a lot more complicated, and I wonder if c-ares should ever get into that game… And BTW, DNSSEC of course doesn’t take away the fact that specific implementations may still be vulnerable to security flaws.

The last talk of the evening was about SSL, or rather TLS, held by Fredrik Hesse. He gave us a pretty detailed insight into how the protocol works, and then a fairly detailed overview of the flaws discovered during the last year or so, primarily MD5 and rogue ca certs, the null-prefix cert names and the TLS renegotiation bug. I felt good about already knowing just about everything of what he told us. I can also boast with having corrected the speaker afterward at the pub where we were having our post-talk-beers as he was evidently very OpenSSL focused when he spoke about what SSL libraries can and cannot do.

A great evening. And with good beers too. Thanks to the organizers!

Linux, Network, Open Source

My Debian Black-out – the price of bleeding edge

6 Comments

Ok, I admit it. I run Debian Unstable so I know I deserve to get hit really bad at times when things turn really ugly. It is called unstable for a reason.

The other day I decided it was about time I did a dist-upgrade. When I did that, I got a remark that I better restart my gnome session as otherwise apps would crash. So I logged out and… I couldn’t login again. In fact, neither my keyboard nor mouse (both on USB) worked anymore! I sighed, and rebooted (for the first time in many months) only to find out that 1) it didn’t fix the problem, both input devices were still non-functional and perhaps even more important 2) the wifi network didn’t work either so I couldn’t login to it from one of my other computers either!

Related to this story is the fact that I’ve been running an older kernel, 2.6.26, since that was the last version that built my madwifi drivers correctly and kernels after that I was supposed to use ath5k for my Atheros card, but I’ve not been very successful with ath5k and thus remained using the latest kernel I had a fine madwifi for.

I rebooted again and tried a more recent kernel (2.6.30). Yeah, then the keyboard and mouse worked again, but the ath5k didn’t get the wifi up properly. I think I basically was just lacking the proper tools to check the wifi network and set the desired ssid etc, but without network that’s a bit of a pain. Also, when I logged in on my normal gnome setup, it mentioned a panel something being broken and logged me out again! 🙁

Grrr. Of course I could switch to my backup – my laptop – but it was still highly annoying to end up being locked out from your computer.

Today I bought myself 20 meter cat5e cable and made my desktop wired so I can reach the network with the existing setup, I dist-upgraded again (now at kernel 2.6.31) and when I tried to login it just worked. Phew. Back in business. I think I’ll leave myself with the cable connected now that I’ve done the job on that already.

The lesson? Eeeh… when things break, fix them!

Network, Open Source

A view of a popular post

1 Comment

So I post frequently on this blog, but I’m not a particularly interesting person myself, I’m not really a master at writing and phrasing articles to make them thrilling and irresistible and I basically only deal with really geeky and technical subjects. It means there’s an average of perhaps 200 views per day.

The other day I wrote my multipath tcp post, and someone submitted it to reddit. It turned out to become my most read posting on my blog ever. By far. I think the “views per day” graph looks pretty cool:

visitor graph from daniel.haxx.se/blog

Development, IT Politics, Network

My IETF 75 Story

A while ago, like a couple of years ago, I joined the mailing list for the HTTPbis effort. That’s the IETF work group which is working on producing an update to the HTTP 1.1 spec RFC2616 that clarifies it and removes things that nobody does or that doesn’t work. That spec is huge and the number of conflicting statements or just generally muddy expressions is large. This work is not near completion yet.

So when I learned the IETF75 meeting was to be held here in Stockholm, I of course cheered the opportunity to get to join in the talks and meet the people here.IETF

IETF is basically just an informal bunch of people who likes internet protocols, “above the wire and below the application”. The goal of the IETF is to make the Internet work better. This is the organization behind the RFCs. They wrote the specs for TCP, FTP, SMTP, POP3, HTTP and a wide range of other protocols we all use non-stop these days. I’m actually quite surprised IETF is so little known. When I mention the organization name, most people just give me a blank face back that reveals it just isn’t known to very many “civilians”.

IETF has meetings around the world 2 or 3 times per year, and every time some 1K-2K people join up and there’s a week filled with working group meetings, talks and a lot of socializing and so on. The attitude is generally relaxed all over and very welcoming for newcomers (like me). Everyone can join any talk or discussion. There’s simply no dress code, but everyone just wears whatever they think is comfortable.

The whole week was packed with scheduled talks and sessions, but I only spent roughly 1.5 days at the conference center as I had to get some “real work” done as well and quite honestly I didn’t find sessions that matched my interest every single day anyway.

After the scheduled days, and between sessions and sometimes instead of the scheduled stuff, a lot of social events took place. People meet in informal gatherings, talk, plans, sessions and dinners. The organizers of this particular even also arranged two separate off-topic social events. As one of the old-timers I talked to said something like “this year was unusually productive, but just about all of that was done outside of the schedule”…

This time. The 75th IETF meeting was hosted by .se in Stockholm Sweden in the end of July 2009. 1230 persons had signed up to come. The entrance fee was 650 USD unless you wanted to pay very late or at the door, as then it was a 130 extra or so. Oh, and we got a t-shirt!

One amusing little detail: on the t-shirt we got there was a “free invite code” to the Spotify streaming music service. But when people at the IETF meeting tried to use it at the conference center, Spotify refused to accept the users claiming it doesn’t work in the US! Clearly they’re not using the most updated ip-geography database in the world! 😉

So let me quickly mention a few of the topics I caught and found interesting, some of which I’ve blogged about separately.

HTTP over SCTP

The guys in the SCTP team works on this draft on how to do HTTP the best possible way over SCTP. They cite tests that claim “web browsing” becomes a better experience when done over SCTP. I’m personally quite interested in this work and in SCTP in general and I hope to be able to play with making libcurl support this in a not too distant future.

How to select TCP or SCTP

Assuming that SCTP gets widespread adoption and even browsers and browser-like apps start support it. How should the clients figure out which transport mechanism to use? The problem is similar to the selection between IPv4 or IPv6 but for the IP choice we can at least use A and AAAA lookups. The suggestions that were presented basically argued for trying all combinations in parallel and going with the fastest to respond, but a few bright minds questioned the smartness of that as it scales very badly if more transport options are added and it potentially introduces a lot more (start-up) traffic.

Getting HTTP from multiple mirrors

What the authors call Multiserver HTTP, is a pretty small suggestion of a few additional HTTP headers that a server would be able to return to a client hinting about other URIs where the exact same file/resource can be downloaded from. A client would then get that resource in parallel from multiple HTTP servers using range requests. Quite inspired by other technologies such as bittorrent and metalink. This first draft faced some criticism of not using existing HTTP as it could, but the general spirit has been welcoming.

The presenter of the idea, Mike Hanley, also mentioned the ability to allow the server response include a wildcard mention, so that a server for example could hint that “other images from this dir path can also be found under this dir path on this other server”. Thus a client would be able to download such images from multiple servers. This idea is not in that draft and I’m not personally sure I think it fits as nicely.

HTTP-state wg

During the IETF week, it was announced that the HTTP-state working group is being formed. It didn’t actually happen on the actual meeting but still… See my separate blog post on http-state.

Multipath TCP

The idea and concept behind MPTCP was new to me but I quickly come to like the thought of getting this into network stacks around me. I hope this will grow up to become something fine! See my separate blog post on multipath tcp for all details.

IRI

I visited the IRI BOF and got some fine insights on the troubles of creating the IRI spec. Without revealing too much, it’s quite clear sometimes that politics can be hard even in these surroundings…

tng – Transport Next Generation

What felt pretty “researchy” and still not really ready for adaption (or am I wrong?) is this effort they call Transport Next Generation. Their ideas include the concept of inserting a whole bunch of more layers into the typical network stuff, to for example move congestion handling into its own layer to be able to make it per network-segment basis instead of only doing end-to-end like today. Apparently they have tests and studies that suggest that the per network-segment basis can improve traffic a lot. These days a lot of the first part and last part of network accesses are done over wireless networks while the core center tends to still be physical cables.

DCCP

I found it interesting and amusing when they presented DCCP with all its bells and whistles, and then toward the end of the presentation it surfaces that they don’t really know what DCCP would be used for and at the moment the work group is pretty much done but there’s just nobody that’s using the protocol…

HTTPbis

HTTPbis is more or less my “home” in the IETF. We had a meeting in which things were discussed, some decisions were made and some new topics were raised. RFC2616 is a monster of a spec and it certainly contains so much details, so many potentially conflicting statements and quite clearly very many implementers have interpreted sections differently, that doing these clarifications is a next to endless work. I figure the work will simply be deemed “done” one day, and the remaining confusions will then just be left. The good part is then that the new document should at least be heaps better than the former. It will certainly benefit future and existing HTTP implementers nonetheless.

And a bunch of the HTTPbis guys got together a bit outside of the meeting as well, so we get to talk quite a bit and top off the evening with a dinner…

OpenDNSSec

There was quite a lot of DNSSEC talk during the week, and it annoys me that I double-booked the evening they had their opendnssec release (or was it tech preview?) party so I couldn’t go there and take advantage of my two free beers!

Observations

Apple laptops. A crushing majority of the people seemed to have Apple branded laptops, and nearly all presentations I saw were done with Apples.

Not too surprising, the male vs female ratio was very very high. I would guess 20:1 to 30:1, at least in those surrounding where I spent my time.

Upcoming Meetings

This week was lots of fun. More fun than I have had in a conference in a very long time. I’ll definately consider going to some upcoming meetings, although the next one in Japan in November doesn’t fit my schedule. Possibly Anaheim in March 2010 and even more likely the 78th meeting in Maastricht in July 2010.

Thanks everyone who was there. Thanks to the hosters for a great event. It was a blast!

Development, Network

Multipath TCP

During the IETF 75 meeting in Stockholm, there was this multipath tcp BOF (“start-up meeting” sort of) on Thursday morning that I visited.

Multipath TCP (shortened to MPTCP at times) is basically an idea to make everything look like TCP for both end points, but allow for additional TCP paths to get added and allow packets to get routed over any of the added flows to overcome congestion and to select the routes where it flows “best”. The socket API would remain unmodified in both ends. The individual TCP paths would all look and work like regular TCP streams for the rest of the network. It is basically a way to introduce these new fancy features without breaking compatibility. Of course a big point of that is to keep functionality over NATs or other middle-boxes. (See full description.)

The guys holding the BOF had already presented a fairly detailed draft how it could be designed both one-ended and with multiple adresses,  but could also boast with an already written implementation that was even demoed live in front of the audience.

The term ‘path’ is basically used for a pair of address+port sets. I would personally rather call it “flow” or “stream” or something, as we cannot really control that the paths are separate from each other as those are entirely in the hands of those who route the IP packets to the destination.

They stressed that their goals here included:

  • perform no worse than TCP would on the best of the single TCP paths
  • be no harder on the network than a single TCP flow would be, not even for single bottlenecks (network and bottleneck fairness)
  • allow resource pooling over multiple TCP paths

A perfect use-case for this is hosts with multiple interfaces. Like a mobile phone with 3G and wifi, as it could have a single TCP connection using paths over both interfaces, and it could even change paths along the way when you move to handover to new wifi access-points or when you plug in your Ethernet cable or whatever. Kind of like a solution to the mobile ip concept with roaming that was never made to actually work in the past.

The multipath tcp mailinglist is already quite active, and it didn’t take long until possible flaws in the backwards compatibility have been discovered and are being discussed. Like if you use TCP to verify that a particular link is alive, MPTCP may in fact break that as the proposal is currently written.

What struck me as an interesting side-effect of this concept, is that if implemented it will separate packets from the same original stream further from each other and possibly make snooping on plain-text TCP traffic harder. Like in the case where you monitor traffic going through a router or similar.

Network, Web

HTTP cookies IETF working group

So finally (remember I mentioned this list when it was created back in January 2009) an IETF http-state working group was created, with the following description:

The HTTP State Management Mechanism (Cookies) was original created by Netscape Communications in their Netscape cookie specification, from which a formal specification followed (RFC 2109, RFC 2965). Due to years of implementation and extension, several ambiguities have become evident, impairing interoperability and the ability to easily implement and use HTTP State Management Mechanism.

I’m on the list from the start and I hope to be able to contribute some of my cookie experiences and knowledge to aid the document to actually end up with something useful. The ambition, while it was “toned down” somewhat since the initial posts of the mailing lists, is still fairly high I would claim:

The working group will refine RFC2965 to:

  • Incorporate errata and updates
  • Clarify conformance requirements
  • Remove known ambiguities where they affect interoperability
  • Clarify existing methods of extensibility
  • Remove or deprecate those features that are not widely implemented and also unduly affect interoperability
  • Add features that are already widely implemented or have a critical mass of support
  • Where necessary, add implementation advice
  • Document the security properties of HTTP State Management Mechanism and its associated mechanisms for common applications

In doing so, it should consider:

  • Implementer experience
  • Demonstrated use of HTTP State Management Mechanism
  • Impact on existing implementations and deployments
  • Ability to achieve broad implementation.
  • Ability to address broader use cases than may be contemplated by the original authors.

The Working Group’s specification deliverables are:

  • A document that is suitable to supersede RFC 2965
  • A document cataloging the security properties of HTTP State Management Mechanism

I think this is a scope that is manageable enough to actually have a chance to succeed and its planning is quite similar to that of the IETF httpbis group. Still, RFC2965 lists a huge pile of stuff that has never been implemented by anyone and even though it was a while since I did read that spec I also expect it to lack several things existing cookie parsers and senders already use. The notorious IE httpOnly is an example I can think of right now.

Network, Web

encrypted file transfer protocols compared

I like putting up some explanatory “this versus that” documents on stuff I know a little about. I’ve done things like curl vs wget, ftp vs http and http vs bittorrent in the past.

This time, I decided it was about time to do a technical comparison of the four major encrypted file transfer protocols SCP, SFTP, FTPS and HTTPS and explain how they differ in as many aspects and viewpoints as possible. I quite often get questions about how some of these compare against some of the others and why you’d use one instead of another etc. I hope this document will help people to find such answers themselves.

Of course I do mistakes and sometimes express myself in muddy ways, so your feedback and help is important. You can help me make this comparison become better!

http://daniel.haxx.se/docs/encrypted-transfer-protocols-compared.html

It’s still rough and all, but what question and comparisons between them do you miss? What mistakes have I done? What parts aren’t spelled out clear enough?