nanog mailing list archives

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network


From: Matt Corallo <nanog () as397444 net>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:20:01 -0500

Note, of course, further, that "the GFW" is not a single appliance, nor
even a standard, common appliance. There are very different "GFWs" based
on which link you're looking at, which telco it is, etc. Indeed, usually
traffic to Hong Kong is effected much less by the GFW than other links
(though still passes through *a* GFW). I've also found traffic destined
to Khabarovsk (depending on the routing) to pass through GFWs which
rarely cause issue.

Matt

On 3/3/20 1:28 PM, Rubens Kuhl wrote:


On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jakob Heitz (jheitz) via NANOG
<nanog () nanog org <mailto:nanog () nanog org>> wrote:

    I can corroborate that. I visited China in August 2019 and had
    terrible internet performance to sites outside of China. This was
    both with mobile and wifi at the homes of two friends, one in
    Heilongjiang and the other in Beijing. When I visited in February
    2015, it was much better. Both times, I was using VNC on the company
    VPN. This does not use much bandwidth, but is quite latency sensitive.


GFW has some different settings that they use, similar to "ThreatCon"...
if civil unrest is happening, its working is changed. During party
conventions, they change it too. 
So when a foreign visits China, that experience might be different from
one visiting during a different time period.

Also, some hotels that only accept international guests backhaul traffic
thru Hong Kong, providing an experience that looks much closer to
US/Europe broadband. 


Rubens

 


Current thread: