Re: Net broken

We've actually (CANDIS) done a lot of research on this and spent many
hours on the phones with our ISP's and contacts and many traceroutes and
arp table lookups.  Needless to say, I am paraphrasing here for brevity.
And omiiting some numbers and specs for commercial confidentiality.

Cheers,
RF.

On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 16:39 +0800, Richard Ford wrote:

> There is a problem between China Telecom and CNC right now.
> 
> Their in ability to get contracts sorted out and start to work as a
> "unit" as opposed to treatign each others networks like fortified
> LAN's is also a problem.
> 
> We have noticed that about from not being able to get reverse DNS
> setup due to the problem.  We are having many packets from our data
> centre (fibre to CNC) taking the logn way around and bouncign between
> cnc and china telecom multiple times to get anywhere.
> 
> This has led us to the discovery of "Good IP" and "Bad IP".  I know -
> it's pathetic - but this is China.
> 
> >From the same host with two IP's bound to the same NIC.  A transfer
> to our HK server takes about 5-9K/sec with the "Bad IP".  A "good IP"
> does it at a rate of 332K/sec!
> 
> Needless to say the good IP's are in short supply and we hold them
> close to our chests....
> 
> Cheers,
> RF.
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 15:34 +0800, Graham Brown wrote: 
> 
> > Dear all,
> > seems thathere is something going on - at first I thought it was just 
> > the usual June 4 thing but it is still going. The block point varies 
> > among the servers, but it is there.
> > 
> >   6  172.30.77.57 (172.30.77.57)  5.333 ms  3.031 ms *
> >   7  219.239.249.9 (219.239.249.9)  6.443 ms  9.230 ms *
> >   8  202.99.57.233 (202.99.57.233)  6.850 ms  6.568 ms *
> >   9  202.99.57.53 (202.99.57.53)  7.331 ms  8.494 ms *
> > 10  219.142.0.1 (219.142.0.1)  12.281 ms  7.561 ms *
> > 11  219.141.130.109 (219.141.130.109)  12.026 ms 219.141.130.125 
> > (219.141.130.125)  7.730 ms 219.141.130.109 (219.141.130.109)  10.234 ms
> > 12  202.97.57.217 (202.97.57.217)  73.087 ms 202.97.57.221 
> > (202.97.57.221)  76.811 ms 202.97.57.217 (202.97.57.217)  72.009 ms
> > 13  202.97.53.5 (202.97.53.5)  70.430 ms  71.349 ms 202.97.53.86 
> > (202.97.53.86) 73.463 ms
> > 14  202.97.53.82 (202.97.53.82)  75.262 ms 202.97.51.214 (202.97.51.214) 
> >   323.678 ms  316.079 ms
> > 15  202.97.51.214 (202.97.51.214)  327.650 ms 
> > sl-gw29-ana-12-2.sprintlink.net (1
> > 
> > $ whois 202.97.51.214
> > % [whois.apnic.net node-2]
> > % Whois data copyright terms    http://www.apnic.net/db/dbcopyright.html
> > 
> > inetnum:      202.97.32.0 - 202.97.63.255
> > netname:      CHINANET-BB
> > descr:        CHINANET backbone network
> > descr:        Data Communication Division
> > descr:        China Telecom
> > country:      CN
> > admin-c:      CH93-AP
> > tech-c:       CH93-AP
> > mnt-by:       APNIC-HM
> > mnt-lower:    MAINT-CHINANET
> > changed:      [email protected] 20000801
> > status:       ALLOCATED PORTABLE
> > changed:      [email protected] 20041214
> > source:       APNIC
> > 
> > person:       Chinanet Hostmaster
> > address:      No.31 ,jingrong street,beijing
> > address:      100032
> > country:      CN
> > phone:        +86-10-66027112
> > fax-no:       +86-10-58501144
> > e-mail:       [email protected]
> > e-mail:       [email protected]
> > nic-hdl:      CH93-AP
> > mnt-by:       MAINT-CHINANET
> > changed:      [email protected] 20021016
> > remarks:      hostmaster is not for spam complaint,please send spam 
> > complaint to [email protected]
> > source:       APNIC
> > 
> > 
> > Simon Cousins wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Graham,
> > > 
> > > We've been having the worst problems with the Great Firewall for three weeks
> > > now.  We have several friends and colleagues which have been suffering
> > > similar random outages and blockages.
> > > 
> > > S.
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: blug-general-bounces-+qp3TudyjKPvfBIPTTProkB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
> > > [mailto:blug-general-bounces-+qp3TudyjKPvfBIPTTProkB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Graham Brown
> > > Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2005 11:07 AM
> > > To: Beijing LUG general non-technical discussion list - Not publicly posted
> > > Subject: [blug-general] Net broken
> > > 
> > > Dear All,
> > > 
> > > The border routers seem to be very slow / broken.
> > > Anyone know what the problem is or when it will be fixed?
> > > 
> > > Graham Brown
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > blug-general list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://list.beijinglug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/blug-general
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > blug-general list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://list.beijinglug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/blug-general
> > > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > blug-general list
> > [email protected]
> > http://list.beijinglug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/blug-general
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blug-general list
> [email protected]
> http://list.beijinglug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/blug-general

_______________________________________________
blug-general list
[email protected]
http://list.beijinglug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/blug-general