Poor Performance SG and HK Servers

[hangpang 1]

We need more Asian servers. The latency on the HK server is right at the bottom almost. The SG server is dropping down the list and now usa servers are having a better latency.

 

We used to have 4 sg servers previously now we have one.

 

Are there any plans to add more asian servers, especially in .sg as they should have the best latency for the rest of Asia ?

 

[go558a83nk 362]

If I recall correctly the 4 servers were 100 mbit/s each.  The 1 now is 1gbit/s. 

 

Latency is a descriptor of the path to the server, not of the server itself.  In other words, if you are seeing latency problems, blame your ISP peerage/routing/IPtransit agreements or perhaps a fault in a line somewhere. 

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

if you are seeing latency problems, blame your ISP peerage/routing/IPtransit agreements or perhaps a fault in a line somewhere.

 

I think there were five. They also had a quite bad reputation, mostly because of their latency. I think it's Singapore's lines' fault.

[go558a83nk 362]

 

if you are seeing latency problems, blame your ISP peerage/routing/IPtransit agreements or perhaps a fault in a line somewhere.

 

I think there were five. They also had a quite bad reputation, mostly because of their latency. I think it's Singapore's lines' fault.

 

4 or 5, 100mbit/s.  they actually worked quite well for me.  my ISP routing to that datacenter was nice.  most of the time routing to Leaseweb Singapore takes me to USA first, then back to Singapore. LOL

[hangpang 1]

If I recall correctly the 4 servers were 100 mbit/s each.  The 1 now is 1gbit/s. 

 

Latency is a descriptor of the path to the server, not of the server itself.  In other words, if you are seeing latency problems, blame your ISP peerage/routing/IPtransit agreements or perhaps a fault in a line somewhere. 

 

I use 4 different 4G LTE and a number of ADSL and fibre connections. They all have problems with the SG server. I conclude the server has poor routing for the Asian region. In fact the usa servers have better latency.

 

Ever heard of load balancing ?

 

The previous 100 mbits servers were much better and were balanced across 4 servers.

 

1 gbits server isn't as good as the previous 4.

[hangpang 1]

 

 

if you are seeing latency problems, blame your ISP peerage/routing/IPtransit agreements or perhaps a fault in a line somewhere.

 

I think there were five. They also had a quite bad reputation, mostly because of their latency. I think it's Singapore's lines' fault.

 

4 or 5, 100mbit/s.  they actually worked quite well for me.  my ISP routing to that datacenter was nice.  most of the time routing to Leaseweb Singapore takes me to USA first, then back to Singapore. LOL

 

Yes you are correct the previous sg servers had excellent latency. The current one is slower than the usa and canada servers.

[go558a83nk 362]

 

If I recall correctly the 4 servers were 100 mbit/s each.  The 1 now is 1gbit/s. 

 

Latency is a descriptor of the path to the server, not of the server itself.  In other words, if you are seeing latency problems, blame your ISP peerage/routing/IPtransit agreements or perhaps a fault in a line somewhere. 

 

I use 4 different 4G LTE and a number of ADSL and fibre connections. They all have problems with the SG server. I conclude the server has poor routing for the Asian region. In fact the usa servers have better latency.

 

Ever heard of load balancing ?

 

The previous 100 mbits servers were much better and were balanced across 4 servers.

 

1 gbits server isn't as good as the previous 4.

 

I agree - routing to Leaseweb Singapore seems to be lacking.

[Brony 0]

I always found them to be slow as well. It might have something to do with Singapore being a major chokepoint for the NSA to intercept traffic through Asia.

[hangpang 1]

The current SG server is slow through Leasweb, the previous ones were very fast and they were Softlayer servers.

 

The HK is even worse it's got the third worst latency for Asia.

 

I'm thinking about cancelling with Air we can't use the net as this slow speed and what is the point of using USA servers.

[go558a83nk 362]

The current SG server is slow through Leasweb, the previous ones were very fast and they were Softlayer servers.

 

The HK is even worse it's got the third worst latency for Asia.

 

I'm thinking about cancelling with Air we can't use the net as this slow speed and what is the point of using USA servers.

 

can you show an MTR to Antares and Hadar?

[Zaroad 26]

And most of European ones are on 15-eyes countries.

[hangpang 1]

 

The current SG server is slow through Leasweb, the previous ones were very fast and they were Softlayer servers.

 

The HK is even worse it's got the third worst latency for Asia.

 

I'm thinking about cancelling with Air we can't use the net as this slow speed and what is the point of using USA servers.

can you show an MTR to Antares and Hadar?

No need to I have done plenty of tests from multiple providers. The SG leaseweb routing goes to USA and back that's why the latency is bad if you are in Asia. The old SG servers routing headed straight out to Asia if you were in asia and hence the latency was half of the current SG server. It's clear cut.

[go558a83nk 362]

the quote is wrong.  I didn't say that.

 

but anyway, routing to a server is a complicated matter.  there is a very good chance your ISP is who's really at fault for bad routing.

[lsat 23]

Poor Asian AirVPN's server performance is exactly AirVPN fault.

It has  nothing to do with

1) your location

2) your ISP

3)Singapore , its politics and whatsoever

 

Why? I simply tested other VPN providers  and it OK with Asian servers generally and Singaporean ones in particular.

Ive already raised this issue with support, but it seems they are reluctant to improve Asian servers.

 

P.S. Actually I don't think that HK server is a good idea to persevere, but decent Japanese and Singaporean servers are must-have ones for  successful competition as a VPN provider.

[hangpang 1]

Poor Asian AirVPN's server performance is exactly AirVPN fault.

It has  nothing to do with

1) your location

2) your ISP

3)Singapore , its politics and whatsoever

 

Why? I simply tested other VPN providers  and it OK with Asian servers generally and Singaporean ones in particular.

Ive already raised this issue with support, but it seems they are reluctant to improve Asian servers.

 

P.S. Actually I don't think that HK server is a good idea to persevere, but decent Japanese and Singaporean servers are must-have ones for  successful competition as a VPN provider.

 

Absolutely agree. I also use other VPN providers and my tests are based on numerous providers from my end.

The best routed servers are in Singapore and Japan with the best backbones.

Unfortunately the current Air SG server has bad routing for the asian region. The previous softlayer ones were good.

I also raised it with support.

[hangpang 1]

the quote is wrong.  I didn't say that.

 

but anyway, routing to a server is a complicated matter.  there is a very good chance your ISP is who's really at fault for bad routing.

 

You didn't read what I said. I use multiple ISP backbones. It's not complicated at all.

[zhang888 1066]

Most of the times mtr logs can help with solving such issues.

Especially when done from multiple ISPs.

 

P.S.

I agree that the SG server doesn't have the best routing at all.

http://bgp.he.net/AS59253#_peers

 

But the HK server has one of the best possible peering options in HK.

http://bgp.he.net/AS55536#_peers

Direct peering with most Asian ISPs.

[go558a83nk 362]

 admit that my ISP routing to leaseweb singapore is off and on.  just in the last couple days I'm back to going through NTT router direct to Antares.  However, I went several months with routing going through USA before this.

 

I'm still not convinced it's the fault of anybody but my ISP.  Leaseweb probably feels they are covered by the peerage they have.  The peerage of Pacnet and NTT is impressive.

[OpenSourcerer 1435]

Most of the times mtr logs can help with solving such issues.

Especially when done from multiple ISPs.

 

P.S.

I agree that the SG server doesn't have the best routing at all.

http://bgp.he.net/AS59253#_peers

 

But the HK server has one of the best possible peering options in HK.

http://bgp.he.net/AS55536#_peers

Direct peering with most Asian ISPs.

 

By the way, thank you for the links! Quite useful. I wonder if there is a site displaying this information in a map-like format...

[zhang888 1066]

Did you mean something like this?

http://www.amcharts.com/tutorials/your-first-ammap/

 

If so, it is very trivial to code in a matter of minutes, but I don't see any benefit in that.

The reason is, in most cases not the country is what matters for the peering overview, but the actual ISP names.

So in case you have a world map with "pins" on the countries with which a specific ASN has a direct peering

(downstream or upstream, doesn't matter) it will still be an additional task to hover or click on the highlighted country,

just to see the ISPs. Again, if I understood you correctly, this is the reason no one probably did it.

 

Check this also:

 

https://www.robtex.com/as/as55536.html#peers

http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=55536

[hippyhoper 0]

I agree we need more asian servers. Very slow at the moment and 2 isn't enough.

[go558a83nk 362]

I agree we need more asian servers. Very slow at the moment and 2 isn't enough.

 

I just checked out Antares (Singapore) and Hadar (HK) 5 minute average charts for today.  Earlier today Antares reached a peak of about 240mbit/s inbound and outbound (480mbit/s total) while Hadar is barely used.  They are 1000mbit/s servers.  I don't know if that's 1000mbit/s total or in each direction.  Staff will have to answer that.  If total, then that would mean that the 240mbit/s peak on Antares was still only half capacity (240 inbound + 240 outbound).  If 1000 each way then it's only 1/4 capacity.  So, I don't think any slowness can be blamed on Air.

[Staff 9973]

 

I agree we need more asian servers. Very slow at the moment and 2 isn't enough.

 

I just checked out Antares (Singapore) and Hadar (HK) 5 minute average charts for today.  Earlier today Antares reached a peak of about 240mbit/s inbound and outbound (480mbit/s total) while Hadar is barely used.  They are 1000mbit/s servers.  I don't know if that's 1000mbit/s total or in each direction.  Staff will have to answer that.  If total, then that would mean that the 240mbit/s peak on Antares was still only half capacity (240 inbound + 240 outbound).  If 1000 each way then it's only 1/4 capacity.  So, I don't think any slowness can be blamed on Air.

 

Hello!

 

1 Gbit/s is total. Only sporadically Antares is required to provide more than 600 Mbit/s. We see rare 600-700 Mbit/s peaks in the last months, so the server is almost never at capacity.

 

Kind regards

[hangpang 1]

Hello Staff,

 

Capacity is only one part of the story. The routing of the SG server isn't good as I have said before the single server has much higher latency then the previous SG servers.

 

The question is are you going to add more servers in the Asian region. I'm not the only one unhappy. If you don't want customers from the Asian and Pacific region then just having this limited offering of servers push users to other providers.

[go558a83nk 362]

I'm not sure how much this issue can be pushed onto Air staff.  They can't control what routing a datacenter has but they can set standards for what datacenters they use so that routing is most likely good for everybody.

 

Examples of datacenters that VPN companies use in Singapore

 

Leaseweb Singapore  - http://bgp.he.net/AS59253#_peers

Softlayer Singapore - http://bgp.he.net/AS36351#_peers

Digital Ocean Singapore - http://bgp.he.net/AS133165#_peers

8 to Infinity Singapore - http://bgp.he.net/AS45470#_peers

(only two real peers, but iptransit and Telin are enough)