Just to add some irony to this. Google is doing some developer days in Beijing and they are going to talk about appengine. And just to really demonstrate how aware Google is of this entire issue they have advertised this on blogspot.com, which is also blocked in China. http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2009/04/google-developer-days-2009-first-three.html
To answer Andys question. Does Google have a plan for dealing with this? I don't think so. On Apr 6, 10:23 pm, WallyDD <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the answer Joe. > > I have to agree it is not a turnkey solution and from the look of > things people are probably better off giving up on GAE and finding an > alternate host. The general feeling I find on the web is that Amazons > service is better suited for the international market. > > On Apr 6, 3:59 pm, Joe Bowman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Get a server and IP that is available in China, but outside of the > > chinese firewall. Configure it to proxy you appspot.com domain. It > > gets tricky handling cookies and session state and such doing this > > though. Not a turnkey solution. Basically all requests to your > > appengine application coming from users using the proxy, will be seen > > as the proxy machine not the individual client machines. There are > > some proxy passthroughs you can do depending on the software you > > choose to handle this. > > > Of course you'll have to pay for the bandwidth usage going through the > > proxy as well. > > > On Apr 6, 12:35 pm, WallyDD <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The internet is indeed a funny place. > > > I did respond with a question on how to set this up but have received > > > no answer? > > > > Any ideas anyone? > > > > On Apr 6, 3:03 am, Paddy Foran <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I'd just like to point out how funny it is that people keep banging on > > > > for Google to respond, and in their banging on for Google to respond, > > > > they missed Google's actual response. > > > > > >> Is there any google staff who is responsible for GAE promotion and > > > > >> technology to say something here? > > > > > >> How can I access to my Google Apps via my own domain directly, e.g. > > > > >> how can access via mail.my_domain.com instead of mail.google.com/a/ > > > > >> my_domain.com? > > > > > >One way to address this is to run a proxy server elsewhere, which will > > > > >allow your site to have it's own unique IP, rather than the shared IPs > > > > >of Google. > > > > > >-Brett > > > > >App Engine Team > > > > > Please note the "App Engine Team" signature. That means Brett (at > > > > least claims he) is from Google. > > > > > Poor Brett was ignored, as people clamoured for Brett to comment. > > > > > This is why I love the internet. It amuses me to no end. > > > > > On Apr 6, 12:48 am, Andy Freeman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > No company is willing to be a pawn in the game of politics between > > > > > > Google and China. > > > > > > That sounds reasonable, but what can Google do to stop the Chinese > > > > > govt from blocking? > > > > > > (1) Google can't tell the Chinese govt what to do. > > > > > > (2) The Chinese govt appears to be technically competent and controls > > > > > the relevant connections, both from the outside and from internal > > > > > datacenters. > > > > > > (3) Google can propose agreements, but China is a soverign entity and > > > > > and can do what it pleases wrt internal matters. (Other posters have > > > > > suggested that buying dinner for the appropriate official would cause > > > > > the blocking to go away. I don't see why the Chinese govt would find > > > > > such an agreement binding.) > > > > > > Yes, one can argue that Google "needs" the Chinese govt to not block, > > > > > but that doesn't imply that Google can do anything to stop the Chinese > > > > > govt from blocking. Google's needs do not obligate the Chinese govt. > > > > > > On Apr 5, 3:16 pm, WallyDD <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Google is more or less obligated to solve this issue. > > > > > > > No company is willing to be a pawn in the game of politics between > > > > > > Google and China. > > > > > > Name a single company (that has any international presence) who > > > > > > would > > > > > > be willing to use GAE knowing full well that it is blocked in its > > > > > > current form? > > > > > > This issue has nothing to do with the Chinese government and there > > > > > > is > > > > > > no way Google will point the finger at them. > > > > > > > Perhaps google can also take on all the other countries that are > > > > > > blocking GAE and while they are at it they can point fingers at > > > > > > corporate america and their firewalls? > > > > > > You have to remember that at the moment this is a "preview release". > > > > > > > I don't really understand why you persist with this argument. You > > > > > > have > > > > > > raised some valid points which should be looked at and considered in > > > > > > the scheme of things but most of the diatribe you present here seems > > > > > > aimed at China/Chinese Government. I have always found prejudices > > > > > > cloud peoples judgement. > > > > > > > To sumarise how this problem will probably be viewed; > > > > > > Google created a dns based system (for GAE addressing) which puts > > > > > > everything though ghs.google.com. This system works really well and > > > > > > from my experience it was very clever and efficient. However it has > > > > > > an > > > > > > issue with firewalls that got overlooked. Google has just recently > > > > > > been made aware of this problem. > > > > > > > On Apr 5, 12:53 pm, Andy Freeman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Feel free to hair-split the word "obligation". > > > > > > > > It's the plain meaning of the word. I apologise for not knowing > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > you didn't know what it meant when you wrote that Google had an > > > > > > > obligation to make GAE available in China. Are there other > > > > > > > statements > > > > > > > that you made without understanding their meaning? > > > > > > > > China availability issue is one of the few issues where folks > > > > > > > claim > > > > > > > that/act like Google has an obligation even though it's an issue > > > > > > > where > > > > > > > Google has very little capability to change things. > > > > > > > > > That's why I want to hear from a Google representative on their > > > > > > > > plan. > > > > > > > > I predict that if Google says anything, it will be roughly > > > > > > > equivalent > > > > > > > to "we're doing what we can". At that point, you'll have to > > > > > > > decide if > > > > > > > the results, which will vary with the whim of the Chinese govt, > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > adequate for your purposes. > > > > > > > > Of course, if you're better at dealing with the Chinese govt than > > > > > > > Google is.... > > > > > > > > > Now just accept that fact and act accordingly. > > > > > > > > And the basis for this order is... > > > > > > > > On Apr 4, 6:11 pm, Andy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I'm someone who understands that obligations come from laws > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > contracts. Feel free to point to the relevant chapter and > > > > > > > > > verse that > > > > > > > > > > However, absent a contract and/or a law, Google isn't > > > > > > > > > obligated to > > > > > > > > > make GAE applications visible in China. > > > > > > > > > Feel free to hair-split the word "obligation". > > > > > > > > > Does Google have the legal obligation to solve this problem? > > > > > > > > No. Just > > > > > > > > like Google doesn't have any legal obligation to improve this > > > > > > > > service > > > > > > > > or add any new features. Does that mean users should stop > > > > > > > > posting any > > > > > > > > thread that's about improving GAE? > > > > > > > > > Does that mean you're going to start polluting every single > > > > > > > > thread in > > > > > > > > this forum by posting your 'Google has no legal obligation to > > > > > > > > do this" > > > > > > > > drivel? > > > > > > > > > > Good for you. And Google may, or may not, offer such an > > > > > > > > > option. Note > > > > > > > > > "may not" - they're under no obligation to do so. (I don't > > > > > > > > > presume to > > > > > > > > > know the risks and costs of offering such an option. After > > > > > > > > > all, China > > > > > > > > > can block at the edge of the data centers, impose conditions, > > > > > > > > > or even > > > > > > > > > shut them down.) > > > > > > > > > Another zero-value drivel. > > > > > > > > > Yes Google may or may not offer that solution, just like they > > > > > > > > may or > > > > > > > > may not offer any solution to any other problems raised in this > > > > > > > > forum > > > > > > > > > That's why I want to hear from a Google representative on their > > > > > > > > plan. > > > > > > > > Your speculation on what Google may or may not do is just that, > > > > > > > > worthless speculation that serves no purpose in this discussion. > > > > > > > > > You're right to not "presume to know" though, seeing how you > > > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > > know anything in this matter. > > > > > > > > > Now just accept that fact and act accordingly.- Hide quoted > > > > > > > > text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
