3 ms·
The article lost credibility right off the bat when it said... "We don't use EC2, but our 4 locations map well to AWS regions: Washington DC to US-East-1, Los
by csears 13y ago
The article lost credibility right off the bat when it said...
"We don't use EC2, but our 4 locations map well to AWS regions: Washington DC to US-East-1, Los Angeles to US-West-1, France to EU-West-1 and Singapore to AP-Southeast-1."
Latency based routing is not geo-load balancing. Just because their data centers are in the same physical area, doesn't mean latency is comparable. Route 53 monitors latency from around the internet to AWS data centers, not the author's data center. Unless they are colo'd in the AWS facilities and hanging off their border router, you can't expect good results from using Route 53 like this.
- latch 13y agoWashington datacenter is Softlayer. They peer with US-East-1. Latency tends to be < 1ms. SG datacenter is also Softlayer. While I don't think they peer directly with AP-Southeast-1, latency in SG tends to be 2-8ms (you know, it's a super small country with only a few carriers). From within SG, latency to any SG location will be 50x-100x better than US-East. The only location that's really off is Ireland -> France..which can explain some, but not other (most) cases.
- rahimnathwani 13y agoThe latency B<->C doesn't inform you about the latency difference between A<->B and A<->C. The traffic may take different routes on its way from A, depending on peering arrangements and traffic conditions. Real-life example: I live in China, and passing traffic through a VPN in Singapore to which I have low latency can speed up (lower latency and better bandwidth) connections to some hosts. Ping times from my domestic ADSL connection to that host are about 90ms because they have direct peering with PCCW. Other hosts in Singapore can be 200ms or more away, even though all of them are <10ms away from each other.