I wanted to post this as I was cruising around the net and came upon an AVG response to a post on Slashdot regarding a 6% rise in their traffic that they attributed to AVG’s malware scanner. The Open Web Analytics blog posted a response they received today from AVG:

“We’d like to thank our web community for bringing these challenges to our attention, as building community trust and protecting all of our users is critical to us. We have modified the Search-Shield component of LinkScanner to only notify users of malicious sites; this modified version will be rolled out on July 9th 2008. As of this date, Search-Shield will no longer scan each search result online for new exploits, which was causing the spikes that webmasters addressed with us. However, it is important to note that AVG still offers full protection against potential exploits through the Active Surf-Shield component of our product, which checks every page for malicious content as it is visited but before it is opened.”

I wasn’t able to find any other source to verify this quote, but found the quick acknowledgment of the problem by AVG to be heartening. Also be curious to whether the fix offered up will result in immediate and noticeable decreases in reported traffic to websites.

If you’ve seen a uptick in visitors to your site over the past month, it may not be real eyes viewing your site but rather a bandwidth hog in the form of an AVG malware scanner.

Slashdot had an interesting note today regarding a 6% rise in their traffic that they attributed to the antivirus vendor AVG:

“AVG is spamming the internet with deceptive traffic pretending to be Internet Explorer. Essentially, users of the software automatically pre-crawl search results, which is bad, but they do so with an intentionally generic user agent. This is flooding websites with meaningless traffic (on Slashdot, we’re seeing them as like 6% of our page traffic now). Best of all, they change their UA to avoid being filtered by websites who are seeing massive increases in bandwidth from worthless robots.”

Why the AVG Uptick?
The AVG malware scanner is called LinkScanner. The Register has detailed the possible cause behind the deceptive traffic in several posts:

“In late February, AVG paired its updated anti-virus engine with a real-time malware scanner that vets search engine results before you click on them. If you search Google, for instance, this LinkScanner automatically visits each address that turns up on Google’s results page. According to the company, more than 20 million people have downloaded the new AVG 8, and this has caused a huge up-tick in traffic on sites across the web, including The Register.”

Could It Impact Me?
While the program may be good from a security perspective of preventing people from visiting malicious sites, it has resulted in increased costs for the website owners paying for the extra bandwidth.

“Adam Beale, who runs a UK-based internet consultancy, says that across his small stable of clients, traffic has spiked as much as 80 per cent on some sites. And this is more than just an inconvenience. After all, sites live and die by their traffic numbers. And net resources aren’t free.”

“Although [the AVG LinkScanner] might be good for the security of users, it’s a real pain for website owners and webmasters,” Beale tells us, having blogged about this growing problem. “It’s causing people to think their traffic is increasing, costing those who pay for bandwidth, and wasting disk space with large amounts of unnecessary lines in log files.”

Resolving the Problem
In writing this post, I’m not trying to sound the alarm, but explaining why visitors or bandwidth demand to a site are increasing is a significant challenge for people like me to figure out. It causes me to question trends that indicate increased blog readership…or in the case of a company seeing increased traffic without an increase in revenues, this can be more problematic.

To really determine whether the added AVG traffic is really the cause of an surprise uptick in web traffic, I would turn to the following articles:

How to beat AVG’s fake traffic spew - The Register
AVG throttles web analytics - Tech Blorge

Please let me know if this is something that has impacted you.

Given our many discussions of 10 Gigabit Ethernet, I thought it would be great to highlight an article that appeared recently in SearchNetworking explaining virtually every facet of 10 Gig.

One aspect that Steve Bigelow covers in the article that we had not covered was issues of compatibility between 10 Gigabit Ethernet (10 GbE) and 1 Gigabit Ethernet. Although compatibility is a fuzzy area, it’s something to be aware of as you look at migrating to 10 GbE. I’m borrowing liberally from the article, as it goes into areas well beyond my technical knowledge.

“Compatibility is still a gray area for 10 Gigabit Ethernet, and there are numerous alternatives for the physical layer (or PHY) — the means of connecting network devices at 10 GigE. With only about 1 million 10 GigE ports shipped in 2007, it’s still too early to tell which physical layer standard will be accepted by the market. High-end 10 GigE networking devices (such as switches) accommodate different physical connectivity types through the use of plug-in “PHY” modules. For example, if -LR fiber connections are called for, a solution provider can recommend the use of corresponding switch modules and NICs for their clients.”

“Backward compatibility is another unknown that any solution provider should consider before mixing Ethernet standards. Price is certainly one important factor. While a 10 GigE port should ideally sense and negotiate the slower connection, the current cost of a 10 GigE port makes it economically pointless. “You wouldn’t plug a 1 GigE server port into a 10 GigE switch — it would never happen,” said Adam Gray, chief technology officer of Novacoast, an IT professional services and product development company headquartered in Santa Barbara, Calif. However, it’s still too early to say with certainty that a 1 GigE NIC from manufacturer A would interoperate properly when connected to a 10 GigE switch port from manufacturer B (or vice versa).”

“Still, 10 GigE and 1 GigE switch ports should operate together within the same switch. For example, a manufacturer’s switch with a mix of 10 GigE ports and 1 GigE ports should work properly. The 1 GigE port(s) would likely interface the switch to slower devices and the remainder of the client’s 1 GigE infrastructure.”

10 Gigabit Resources
As I mentioned before we’ve covered deploying 10 GbE on numerous occasions. I also found other articles highlighting 10 Gb compatibility issues.

• 10 Gigabit Ethernet - Outlines networks requirements, implementation structures, layer interfaces
• 10 GbE Management and Security Considerations - In this post I asked other network professionals how they prepared for deploying 10 Gb
• Hidden Deployment Obstacles - Post quickly covers some of the issues IT can overlook when rolling out 10 Gb

• How to configure wireless access points - Have a networking question? Chances are SearchNetworking is going to have it, whether its troubleshooting common router issues or output options for Snort data. Today, there’s a comprehensive piece on configuring wiresless access points to ensure optimal signal strength and performance.
• Email is not communication - Note to IT managers: When rolling out major applications or projects, notifying users of major IT initiatives by e-mail just won’t cut it. The IT Skeptic amusingly reminds us of the lost art of talking, which is critical for answering user questions and ensuring the success of new technologies.
• Questions with Interop’s Chief Architect - Ever wonder about the pressures ands tasks of managing a huge network show like Interop? This last week our friends at the ScienceLogic blog were able to chat with Geoff Home of InteropNet about the challenges and changes during his time at the Interop network helm.
• ‘Quality of Experience’ revisited - With applications like VoIP and Salesforce.com driving communications and applications to the network, Dennis Drogseth argues that network managers should rely on metrics that better reflect the user experience . He states that Quality of Service (QoS) has generally taken on a technical, bandwidth-centric definition, but is far from summing up what really counts to the end user. His column looks at QoE, or Quality of Experience, because it is not centered in technology, but in the flesh-and-blood experience of the user consuming services. It’s an important discussion to have as business processes become more network driven.

SecurityDude, CISSP-ISSAP is an IT consultant, Security & Privacy Advocate and blogger at large with over 20 years IT experience. SecurityDude shares tips, tricks, and info that the average networking professional will find interesting and indispensable.

When I was a little boy, I started taking things apart to see how they worked. At first, I had a hard time putting them back together. When I disassembled the dish washer on the kitchen floor in 3rd grade, my parents were convinced I either had severe brain damage, or was destined to become an engineer.

As it turns out, I am not brain-damaged… if this scenario sounds eerily familiar, you will enjoy “The Knack” video clip from the short-lived Dilbert® TV series. If you are one of those folks who still takes everything apart to see how it works, there is an O’Reilly magazine called “Make” designed for geeks just like us. I am a satisfied subscriber.

This brings me to the Evil Empire. I was downloading a copy of WFetch 1.4 from Microsoft, when the site offered me a “sneak preview” of the “new” Microsoft Download site that uses Microsoft’s new Silverlight technology. From that page, I got curious and clicked the for the beta site of Microsoft Videos. One of the featured videos is How to make a mouse work in mid-air with Soap. This video not only demonstrates a cool new pointing device that Microsoft Research is developing, they actually show you how to make one in the video.

If you are a successful Evil Empire with billions of dollars in cash (like Microsoft), you can afford to have a world-class research center. Unlike a lot of other large research organizations, Microsoft Research shares their toys (some of them at least). Take a look at the Microsoft Research Download site. There are some very useful tools there.

A few months ago we asked 600 IT professionals and executives about network monitoring and troubleshooting practices. One area we covered was using NetFlow to monitor and troubleshoot network and application performance. Earlier this week, I explored NetFlow use and trends more in-depth.

Overall we found that 23% of respondents used NetFlow to monitor network performance, while 60% did not use flow technologies. 17% were unsure whether they had any type of flow collector.

Significance of Size
A strong correlation exists between network size and whether an organization relies on NetFlow to monitor performance. Enterprise-sized organizations (33%) were the leaders in NetFlow use, followed by networks of between 500-2499 users (26%). There was a clear drop off in NetFlow use (16%) by smaller organizations.

We illustrate this trend below. Use is classified by network size.
NetFlow

Impact of Geography
Another variable I looked at was the organization’s location. With only a 4% difference between North American (20%) and European (24%) organizations using NetFlow, I didn’t think geography was a statistically relevant factor. Interestingly, 32% of Asian respondents said they used NetFlow. The sample size of Asian organizations, however, wasn’t large enough to allow me to compare it to other locations.

The NetFlow Takeaway
Many respondents were unaware of NetFlow or didn’t leverage the technology for monitoring. These answers accounted for 77% of respondents. This clearly suggests an opportunity to help people affordably gain network visibility with NetFlow.

To place the numbers into perspective, I searched for other studies on NetFlow use. I found a study by the Aberdeen Group that fell in line with our results, especially at the enterprise level.

In a recent E-Commerce Times interview of Derek E. Brink, vice president and research director for the IT research firm:

“In recent studies we’ve asked questions about current use versus planned use of solutions that leverage network flow data. One study in particular showed that 31 percent of all respondents currently use such solutions, with an additional 36 percent indicating plans to use it within the next two years. Companies are definitely looking to improve their network security, and also the efficiency of their operations…”

Conversations between the CIO and CFO can sometimes be like two ships passing in the night. Network professionals speak in bits and bytes, while the CFO only understands dollars and cents. Talking about any IT project with the CFO can be hard, but this difficulty increases when discussing the loosely-defined buzzword Unified Communications.

With Nortel offering up ads on CNN discussing their unified communications management tools, I guarantee we’re only going to see more UC in the future. Given that UC isn’t a single, silver-bullet solution rather many network-driven communication applications, how do you speak to the CFO and management about these tools.

Charles Thompson, our System Engineering Manager, discusses in an IT-Finance Connection podcast how to approach the CFO and business managers with unified communication projects.

Listen to the Podcast: Unified Communications Isn’t an Overnight Sensation

In the podcast, Thompson addresses:

• Top 3 things IT should communicate to business managers about UC
• Identifying hidden potential costs of a UC rollout
• Managing user expectations
• Potential network and security issues with unified communications

So yesterday I blogged briefly about the benefits of WiMAX in easily reaching many end-users from a single deployment. So with all of this promise, you might be wondering, “Well, where is WiMAX today?”

WiMAX on the Rise
The article from NEC Unified Solutions, “WiMAX and the Last Mile“, outlines the brief and initially promising history of the technology in the U.S.:

“The very first standard for WiMAX technology was made available around 1999, with various amendments made through 2005. While the technology has gained swift, widespread adoption in many countries, growth in the US has been slow and localized.”

“In 2006, Sprint (in conjunction with Clearwater Telecommunications) announced plans to collaborate on a three-year, nationwide WiMAX deployment through its brand Xohm. As the only major US major telecommunications provider to date to propose a large-scale launch, Sprint conducted a successful soft launch of the product to Chicago, Baltimore and Washington, DC residents at the end of 2007. The company’s initial plan was to further extend coverage to 100 million additional people in various metropolitan areas by the end of 2008.”

Going Down?
With Sprint, the only major telecom provider backing WiMAX, undergoing great change in management as well as business mission, WiMAX’s future at least in this country seems to be floundering. In April 2008, Sprint announced another delay in the release of its commercial WiMAX service. On the other hand, the company is moving forward with its Chicago WiMAX deployment, and its venture with Clearwire received a cash infusion of $3.2 billion from Google Inc., Intel Corp., Comcast Corp. and Time Warner Cable Inc.

Right now it’s too early to tell exactly how WiMAX is doing? Nortel announced they were dropping WiMAX in favor of another high-speed wireless technology, Long Term Evolution (LTE). Matt Hamblen of ComputerWorld outlined the battle between the two technologies last month. Although WiMAX has a time advantage, with other major communication players lining up behind LTE, it may not matter. Hamblen’s article goes on to state:

“WiMax and LTE are directly comparable in terms of what they do, and it’s very likely LTE will have a significant global advantage over WiMax in the long term,” said Craig Mathias, an analyst at The Farpoint Group and a Computerworld columnist. “But that doesn’t mean WiMax is toast or won’t survive, although I’m not even sure of [Sprint's] expected time-to-market advantage when we talk about critical mass penetration.

“LTE is the natural upgrade path for GSM, and that leads me to conclude that LTE will be one tough cookie for WiMax to beat,” he added.

WiMAX vs. LTE
Reading Hamblen’s article and it sounds like the standards debate could be up in the air for several years. Vendors could avoid this debate by developing devices that support both standards as Intel has called for, but I think this will be more like the debate of HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray. There can be only one winner.

The following links present proponents and predictors for each technology:
WiMAX or Wi-Min? - Thoughts on why WiMAX may not be the next big thing
Amsterdam Switches on WiMAX - Europe’s “first” mobile WiMAX city
Why Nortel Chose LTE - NetworkWorld discusses the motivations behind Nortel’s LTE decision
LTE vs. WiMAX - GigaOM explores this 4G sibling rivalry

You may remember back in mid-2007, Sprint Nextel made an announcement to invest $5 billion into building their WiMAX network to offer high-speed wireless Internet access. I thought I would take a quick look today at “why” wireless providers are looking at WiMAX. Tomorrow, I will track the current and future state of WiMAX networks.

The Last Mile
The “Last Mile” is a term, at least in the communications industry, that refers to the final leg in the journey of delivering the product or service to the customer. So for internet providers it would be the last mile of cable or wiring that connects the customer to their network.

With the cost of internet services going down and bandwidth demand from customers increasing, providers are looking for the least expensive way to provide high-speed access to customers. Connecting customers individually is very expensive, which is why a wireless technology like WiMAX is attractive.

An article by NEC Unified Solutions, “WiMAX and the Last Mile” explains the advantages of WiMAX:

“WiMAX delivers high-speed broadband Internet without the need for underground cabling or wiring. WiMAX establishes wireless connectivity using microwave radio links that communicate with towers connected to a standard, wired connection. As a result, one connection has a service range of up to 30 miles. WiMAX is capable of sharing data at a rate of anywhere from 10 to 70 mbps, which is enough to provide high-speed Internet access to up to a thousand homes and businesses.”

“WiMAX, unlike many other wireless technologies, requires no direct line of sight between its source and endpoint. What’s more, What’s more, its point-to-multipoint architecture simplifies providing connectivity for large groups and remote populations, making it an ideal solution for enhancing the last mile of service.”

WiMAX Resources
WiMAX FAQ? - WiMAX Forum
How WiMAX Works - HowStuffWorks
Get the latest on WiMAX - WiMAX Networking News

I have been doing a lot of reading on unified communication (UC) offerings, but am by no means an expert. I am looking for resources or contacts to blog about unified communication solutions from Cisco, Microsoft, Nortel, IBM, Avaya, NEC, Alcatel/Lucent, Siemens, Mitel, or other major UC vendors.

If you have any feedback, guidance, or are a vendor rep, please contact me. My e-mail is blog at networkinstruments dot com.