I'd recommend Equinix which has a site in Hong Kong which I would recommend over mainland China. http://www.equinix.com/locations/map/asiapacific/hongkong/ Shane On Sep 8, 2009, at 12:02 PM, Benjamin Billon wrote:

For Asia, I'd say Hong Kong (and personnaly Mega iAdvantage).

Could be interesting thoughts on this previous thread: http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2009-July/012161.html

Mainland China may be fine for very special needs, but I'd advise to go to HK 95% of the time.

Michael K. Smith - Adhost a écrit :

...

Sorry to respond to my own message! Given the replies so far I think I should expand China to include Hong Kong.

Regards,

Mike

-- Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GISP Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith@adhost.com w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)

...

-----Original Message----- From: Michael K. Smith - Adhost [mailto:mksmith@adhost.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 8:41 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Datacenter recommendations - China and Latin America

Hello Everyone:

Does anyone have any recommendations for data centers in China (PRC) and Latin America? The Latin America site doesn't have to be in any particular country within the region, although facilities with good network connectivity are obviously preferred.

Regards,

Mike

-- Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GISP Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith@adhost.com w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)

On Sep 8, 2009, at 12:35 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:

Shane Ronan wrote:

...

I'd recommend Equinix which has a site in Hong Kong which I would recommend over mainland China. http://www.equinix.com/locations/map/asiapacific/hongkong/

What is the Great Firewall relationship between Hong Kong and the mainland PRC, as compared to the mainland PRC vs. the rest of the world?

Broadly speaking, the relationships are identical -- otherwise many/ most things that are currently in China would be in HK. TV

-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671

For those who have a real need for both hosting within the Chinese autonomous routing domain *and* good, English-friendly remote hands support, I would also recommend considering the Silk Road Technologies data center in Hangzhou: http://www.srt.com.cn/en/ TV On Sep 8, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:

Hello:

Thank you to everyone that provided off-list recommendations. I've compiled the list of providers in no particular order.

Regards,

Mike

Latin America

- Securehost - http://www.securehost.com - Triara (Telmex) - http://www.triara.com/Datacenter.htm - KIO Networks - Xertix - Hortolandia - CyDC (Brazil Telecom) - http://www.cydc.com.br - ALOG - http://www.alog.com.br - Terremark - http://www.terremark.com.br - Locaweb (Brazil)

China/Hong Kong

- Telehouse Beijing - http://www.telehouse.com/globalfacilities.php#asia - Vianet - http://www.21vianet.com/en/index.jsp - Mega-Iadvantage - http://www.iadvantage.net/facilities/facilities_megai_main.html - Dailan - InterNAP (partnering with Equinix) - Equinix - http://www.equinix.com/locations/map/asiapacific/hongkong/

-- Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GISP Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith@adhost.com w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)

On Sep 8, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Benjamin Billon wrote:

You could get a China Telecom link in HK as well as many others: sit astride the Great Firewall!

From a cost, operational, and routing perspective, the same would be true if you got a CT link in Los Angeles or San Francisco. Since CT and CNC control all routes between China and everywhere else in the world-- including HK -- and the outsideCN-to-insideCN segment is going to be the most expensive and complicated element of any path between China and anywhere else, the choice of interconnect location with your preferred China-side service provider provider is largely going to be a matter of personal taste/local convenience. Don't get me wrong, I like Hong Kong too -- just trying to make sure that everyone understands the situation clearly... TV

...

What is the Great Firewall relationship between Hong Kong and the mainland PRC, as compared to the mainland PRC vs. the rest of the world?

On Sep 9, 2009, at 4:11 AM, Benjamin Billon wrote:

...

From a cost, operational, and routing perspective, the same would be true if you got a CT link in Los Angeles or San Francisco. I can't be sure (didn't try myself, sorry) but I think CT links are more filtered from outside PRC (HK being included in PRC)

Perhaps, but I believe that would only be consistently/reliably true for the smallish international intra-enterprise links of non-network services companies, e.g., between manufacturer-x's CN subsidiary and manufacturer-x's offshore corporate HQ.

...

Since CT and CNC You mean China Unicom =)

Indeed -- thanks for the correction.

...

control all routes between China and everywhere else in the world-- including HK -- and the outsideCN-to-insideCN segment is going to be the most expensive and complicated element of any path between China and anywhere else, the choice of interconnect location with your preferred China-side service provider provider is largely going to be a matter of personal taste/local convenience.

and when asking to go through the Great Firewall, you (I don't mean YOU, TV) should first focus on your objectives. Do you truly think that because you got a network foot inside Mainland China, your services will be easy to reach for all Chinese Netizens?

Exactly the right question. However (unless I am badly dated on these points also), the phrasing could be a little misleading, because: 1. You* will not get a layer-3 "network foot" inside China -- not one that's bigger than a LAN anyway, and certainly not one that's connected to anything outside China without first transiting CT or CUC (that's what I meant by "Chinese autonomous routing domain"). 2. You* will not get (or alternately, not want) to extend a layer-2 "network foot" inside China, because at best you'll get no further than the CT or CUC office closest to the landing station -- and that would put you in no different operational position (except perhaps much poorer) than if you interconnected in HK, LA, etc. Indirectly managed, locally hosted, and directly on-net with one of the two large access providers is the only formula that *might* make some kind of presence in China different from & better than trying to reach Chinese Internet users from across the border. But even that can be quite challenging to arrange and maintain over time... Nuff said (but would be grateful for other corrections/updates based on very recent firsthand experience), TV