Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Thank you for your insights. We are not so familiar with interconnect and peering, we will ask you some questions for clarification first. Hope you don't mind. :-) When there is a tri-opoly, with no opportunity of competition, its easily > possible to set prices which are very different than

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

I see. Thank you! Best, Pengxiong Zhu Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, Riverside On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 9:13 AM Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 21/Mar/20 09:09, Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > > How do they deliberately congest peering ports? Do you hear from those

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On 21/Mar/20 09:09, Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > How do they deliberately congest peering ports? Do you hear from those > Chinese operators or you observe this from the traffic? Simple - let them run at 350% of capacity and pipeline upgrades for Lord knows how long :-). On a serious note, let's

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

> > I know about Chinese operators who will deliberately congest peering ports > to influence 3rd party network behaviour. How do they deliberately congest peering ports? Do you hear from those Chinese operators or you observe this from the traffic? Most countries in Africa do not implement

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

oops. missed a spot. -Ben Cannon CEO 6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC b...@6by7.net > On Mar 2, 2020, at 2:36 PM, David Burns wrote: > > Did you compare CERNET with commodity networks? (My anecdotal observations > from a couple years ago suggest that Internet2 to

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On 15/Mar/20 22:51, Frank Habicht wrote: > > thanks for the "quotes", Mark. I agree. > > https://www.caida.org/publications/presentations/2018/investigating_causes_congestion_african_afrinic/investigating_causes_congestion_african_afrinic.pdf > > page 23: > Results Overview > • No evidence of

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On 15/03/2020 13:07, Mark Tinka wrote: > On 15/Mar/20 09:55, Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > >> I know Caida has one paper on the congestion on Africa's IXPs substrate. > > I can't think of a single IXP in Africa that is "congested". thanks for the "quotes", Mark. I agree.

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On 15/Mar/20 09:55, Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > I know Caida has one paper on the congestion on Africa's IXPs substrate. I can't think of a single IXP in Africa that is "congested". Do you have more data? > However, we did find Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa have better > transnational

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

> > Most countries in Africa do not implement great big firewalls. Our > problems are quite different :-\... > I know Caida has one paper on the congestion on Africa's IXPs substrate. However, we did find Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa have better transnational performance than China, while the

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

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

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jakob Heitz (jheitz) via NANOG < 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

RE: China’s Slow Transnational Network

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,

RE: China’s Slow Transnational Network

ISPs (CT, CU and CM) can offer service to home users in China. Regards, David From: NANOG On Behalf Of Pengxiong Zhu Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 6:55 AM To: Compton, Rich A Cc: North American Network Operators' Group ; Zhiyun Qian Subject: Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network DDoS traffic

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On 3/Mar/20 00:57, Tom Paseka via NANOG wrote: > > Prices are set artificially high, so their interconnection partners > wont purchase enough capacity. additionally, the three don't > purchase enough to cover demand for their own network. Results in > congestion. We've seen somewhat similar

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On 2/Mar/20 07:00, Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > Compared to other countries we measured including both developed and > developing, China's transnational network performance is among the > worst (comparable and even worse than some African countries). Most countries in Africa do not implement great

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Most of the performance hit is because of commercial actions, not censorship. When there is a tri-opoly, with no opportunity of competition, its easily possible to set prices which are very different than market conditions. This is what is happening here. Prices are set artificially high, so

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

*NANOG Email List on behalf of Pengxiong > Zhu > *Date: *Monday, March 2, 2020 at 8:58 AM > *To: *NANOG list > *Cc: *Zhiyun Qian > *Subject: *China’s Slow Transnational Network > > > > Hi all, > > > > We are a group of researchers at University of C

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Yes, CERNET has indeed smaller slowdown period(4 hours) than commodity networks(12 hours), but still has slowdown. Best, Pengxiong Zhu Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, Riverside On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 2:36 PM David Burns wrote: > Did you compare CERNET

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

> > You seem to be implying that you don't believe/can't see the GFW No, that's not what I meant. I thought mandatory content filtering at the border means traffic throttling at the border, deliberately or accidentally rate-limiting the traffic, now I think he was referring to GFW and the side

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Did you compare CERNET with commodity networks? (My anecdotal observations from a couple years ago suggest that Internet2 to CERNET is very good when other paths are poor to unusable.) --David Burns On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:58 AM Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > Hi all, > > We are a group of

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

In fact, Great Canon (GC) [55] is such an in-path system. But it is known for intercepting a subset of traffic (based on protocol type) only. What’s more, GC has been activated only twice in history (the last one in 2015 [55]). --- AT security says

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

iversity of California, Riverside > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 8:11 AM Compton, Rich A > wrote: > >> My guess is that it’s all the DDoS traffic coming from China saturating >> the links. >> >> >> >> *From: *NANOG Email List on behalf of >> Pengxiong Zh

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Yes, we agree. The poor transnational Internet performance effectively puts any foreign business that does not have a physical presence (i.e., servers) in China at a disadvantage. The challenge is to find out direct evidence to prove mandatory content filtering at the border, if the government is

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

, > Pengxiong Zhu > Department of Computer Science and Engineering > University of California, Riverside > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 8:11 AM Compton, Rich A > wrote: > >> My guess is that it’s all the DDoS traffic coming from China saturating >> the links. >&

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Yes, the sentence is missing a ‘not’. Sorry about that. It’s not discriminating or differentiating any specific kinds of traffic. On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 10:56 AM Valdis Klētnieks wrote: > On Sun, 01 Mar 2020 21:00:05 -0800, Pengxiong Zhu said: > > > There are a few things noteworthy regarding

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

> find out direct evidence of mandatory content filtering at the border You seem to be implying that you don't believe/can't see the GFW, which seems surprising. I've personally had issues with traffic crossing it getting RST'd (luckily I was fortunate enough to cross through a GFW instance which

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Poor network performance between the Chinese networks and the rest of the world is not a bug ; it's an intentional feature. The government of China has constructed these multiple systems to both control what information is or is not received by their citizens, but also to ensure that domestic

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 11:46 AM Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > Those are good insights. Our first guess is censorship too, and we > discussed the possibilities of censorship side effects in Section 5.1 > *Censorship*. > > My guess is that it’s all the DDoS traffic coming from China saturating >> the

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

On Sun, 01 Mar 2020 21:00:05 -0800, Pengxiong Zhu said: > There are a few things noteworthy regarding the phenomenon. First of all, > all traffic types are treated equally, HTTP(S), VPN, etc., which means it > is discriminating or differentiating any specific kinds of traffic. This sentence is

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

It also gives local competitors a leg up by helping domestic apps perform better simply by being hosted domestically (or making foreign players host inside China). > On Mar 2, 2020, at 11:27, Ben Cannon wrote: > >  > It’s the Government doing mandatory content filtering at the border. Their

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

It’s the Government doing mandatory content filtering at the border. Their hardware is either deliberately or accidentally poor-performing. I believe providing limited and throttled external connectivity may be deliberate; think of how that curtails for one thing; streaming video? -Ben.

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

My guess is that it’s all the DDoS traffic coming from China saturating the links. From: NANOG Email List on behalf of Pengxiong Zhu Date: Monday, March 2, 2020 at 8:58 AM To: NANOG list Cc: Zhiyun Qian Subject: China’s Slow Transnational Network Hi all, We are a group of researchers

Re: China’s Slow Transnational Network

Maybe... I dunno get rid of the Great Firewall of China? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Firewall On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:59 AM Pengxiong Zhu wrote: > Hi all, > > We are a group of researchers at University of California, Riverside who > have been working on measuring the transnational

China’s Slow Transnational Network

Hi all, We are a group of researchers at University of California, Riverside who have been working on measuring the transnational network performance (and have previously asked questions on the mailing list). Our work has now led to a publication in Sigmetrics 2020 and we are eager to share some