nanog mailing list archives
Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs
From: Matt Corallo <nanog () as397444 net>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 12:47:22 -0700
No one suggested it isn’t censorship, you’re bating here. Not deploying enough international capacity is absolutely a form or censorship deployed to great avail - if international sites load too slow, you can skimp on GF appliances! Matt
On Apr 1, 2020, at 12:26, Pengxiong Zhu <pzhu011 () ucr edu> wrote: Many are suggesting it is likely influenced by commercial decisions instead of censorship.
Current thread:
- The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Pengxiong Zhu (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Ca By (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Pengxiong Zhu (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Ca By (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Pengxiong Zhu (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Matt Corallo (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Pengxiong Zhu (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Jay Hennigan (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Valdis Klētnieks (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Matt Corallo via NANOG (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Valdis Klētnieks (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Ca By (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Tom Beecher (Apr 01)
- Re: The Cost of Paid Peering with Chinese ISPs Pengxiong Zhu (Apr 01)