Re: Slow Down

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 12:15:59 +0800, Chris Blunt <mail@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:09:37 +0700, Good soldier
<Decypher_address@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:15:56 +0800, Chris Blunt <mail@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:34:05 +0700, Good soldier
<Decypher_address@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 11:08:02 +0800, Chris Blunt <mail@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 18:14:37 GMT, Blade@xxxxxxxxxx (Deckard) wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:57:09 +0700, Good soldier
<Decypher_address@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:57:57 +0800, Chris Blunt <mail@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
<...>

Newsgroups such as this one are carried by thousands of different news
servers all over the world. If you're getting a slow response, it just
means the particular server that you connect to is slow.

You didn't say which server you are connecting to, but possibly you
are using a free one provided by your ISP. You don't have to use that
if you don't want to. There are plenty of other news servers in other
locations that you could use, some free, some chargeable. For that
reason, Usenet is one thing the Thai government will never be able to
block access to.

Chris


Chris, I am aware that there is more then one NNPT server in the world
and I use several different providers.

My point was that using the same servers that I have been using for
the past several years I have a sudden slow down in both speed and
frequency of dropped connections in the past week.

Thus my question.


Cheers,

schweik
(Correct Address is goodsoldierschweikatgmaildotcom)

Moreover, I think that now any government can block Usenet access to
ordinary citizen inside the country. The usual excuse is security
reasons, offensive posts, pornographic files, etc. The era of free
anonymous internet is a thing of the past IMO.

I don't think so, Mort. Its not like blocking access to a web site
where that site is hosted at one location only and can be identified
by its IP address. As I said in my reply to GS, there are thousands of
news servers located all over the world and the Thai government
couldn't possibly keep track of and block access to them all. If they
blocked one it would be easy to switch to another.

Chris

Sorry Chris but you're wrong. Both Singapore and Thailand monitor
and block Internet traffic.

Wait a minute, I never claimed that Thailand doesn't block any
internet traffic. Its well known that they try to block access to
several web sites. What I'm saying is that they cannot effectively
block access to Usenet newsgroups for the simple reason that there are
so many NNTP servers around the world all carrying the same
information. If they blocked one then users could just switch to
another. I specifically referred to Usenet, but apparently you took
that to mean access to web sites.

Chris

They don't block access to a server, in the sense that they build some
sort gate at the server's front door. They simply monitor all Internet
traffic flow into or out of Thailand or Singapore and put a filter in
the monitoring system that stops transmission of data to or from
either a specific server, or messages containing specified data, or
messages on a specific subject.

Sorry, but I think you misunderstand how it works. They cannot, and do
not, examine the detailed contents of all internet traffic passing in
and out of the country. For a start, internet traffic is broken up and
transmitted in discrete IP packets as it leaves your computer. For
anyone intercepting that data it would be impossible to tell whether
the information contained in one of those packets formed part of the
subject of a message or had some other meaning. Its only when all the
data has reached its destination and has been reconstructed that the
context and meaning become clear. If you don't think what I'm saying
is correct then please provide a real-life example of a message
subject, or text of a message that you have been unable to post from
Thailand, and tell me where you were trying to send it.

What you say is quite interesting given that the Singapore Government
has arrested, tried , convicted, and sentenced an individual for
posession of pornography based on interception of his downloads.

While certainly internet messages are broken up and sent as packets
there is nothing that prevents interception of the messages and I
can't imagine why you assert that it is impossible as it has been done
for years.

Certainly one can set up a tunnel and bypass the normal ports and
bypass the monitors but that is immaterial for this discussion. If you
had read the reference I provided you would have read the statement
that "analysis of the traffic suggest that the authorities are
intercepting anything on standard SMTP port 25, regardless of the
destination IP address".

I'm amazed that you think Internet monitoring is not, and has not for
some years, been going on.

What actually happens is the Thai government block access to certain
web sites. There are no reports so far of them having blocked access
to any NNTP servers. They do that by getting local internet service
providers to block the IP address of the web sites they don't like. If
you want proof of what I'm saying then set up a VPN connection to a
location outside of Thailand and try to access any of those "blocked"
web sites. You'll find that you can connect to any of them because
your connection to the web site is through the VPN tunnel, and not at
the local ISP level. However, the data itself is still passing through
the CAT international gateway.


Chris

Chris, you seem to be ignoring the crux of my original post that my
news group feeds seem to have slowed down.

You start by advising me that there many NNTP servers - a fact that I
have been aware of for about as long as Usenet has been in existence.
Added to that I use two different NNTP accounts, both of which have
slowed down. This my original question whether it was only me, or did
others experience the same phonomania. which, I might add, you have
never responded to.

We are getting pretty far afield when we start talking about TCP/IP
protocol when the original question was "are things slowing down".

I really don't want to get involved in a detailed discussion of TCP/IP
protocol as, while it did interest me 20 years ago, I have pretty much
come to believe that there better things to worry about.

So, Chris, whether you want to assume you won or lost, as far as I am
concerned this exchange has ended.


Cheers,

schweik
(Correct Address is goodsoldierschweikatgmaildotcom)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Slow Down
    ... There are plenty of other news servers in other ... couldn't possibly keep track of and block access to them all. ... that to mean access to web sites. ... posession of pornography based on interception of his downloads. ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • Re: Slow Down
    ... There are plenty of other news servers in other ... couldn't possibly keep track of and block access to them all. ... I never claimed that Thailand doesn't block any ... that to mean access to web sites. ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • RE: IIS6 Security and other web servers
    ... IIS6 Security and other web servers ... I know of no Windows architecture that is exposed directly to ... I know of a number of LAMP-type servers that are ... exposed directly to the Internet with no intervening layers. ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • Re: Restrict Dynamic Updates
    ... exposed to the Internet is an inherently bad idea, but am in a position where ... my thought was to leave the clients pointing to the BIND/DNS ... servers to resolve all non-AD queries and redirect them to the AD/DNS servers ... internal DNS server host external public data. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.dns)
  • Re: Windows client - internet connection sharing
    ... or USB port on your FreeBSD box. ... This enables you to set up a 'DMZ' network, ... instance have several servers visible on the Internet. ...
    (freebsd-questions)
Loading