Why Internet Data Takes the Long Route: A Case from Kazakhstan to Indonesia
When an internet packet from Almaty, Kazakhstan, tries to reach a destination in East Java, Indonesia, the path it takes turns out to be much more complex than one might expect. Instead of following a straight line over a distance of approximately 6,679 km, the data travels an additional 5,592 km, reaching London, United Kingdom, before returning to its final destination. The resulting circular route leads to a delay of 371 milliseconds (RTT), which is more than six times the physical minimum of 67 milliseconds that would be possible with ideal optical communication.
Why does the packet travel so far?
The main reason for such a lengthy route lies in the complex infrastructure of inter-network interaction (peering) and the economics of network transit. According to GeoCables, the traffic passes through key transit providers: JSC Transtelecom (AS41798) in Kazakhstan, KVANT-TELECOM (AS43727) and MegaFon (AS31133) in Russia, as well as CTGNet (AS23764) in the United Kingdom. Each of these nodes plays a role in routing the data, but the lack of direct connections between networks or the economic advantage of using major transit operators often results in such long detours.
For example, Moscow and London are major internet hubs with highly developed traffic exchange points. Packets are often routed through them to bypass less optimal routes or take advantage of more reliable channels. However, this can lead to significant delays, especially when the endpoints are located in geographically distant regions.
Practical implications for users
Such delays are not merely technical details; they have real consequences for end-users. An average delay of 371 milliseconds can significantly degrade the quality of video calls, causing speech delays and connection disruptions. For online gaming, this means a noticeable increase in response time (ping), making multiplayer games that require quick interactions almost unplayable. In financial trading, such delays can result in losing a competitive edge, especially when every millisecond counts.
Cloud services, such as data storage or remote computing, are also affected. Users may experience slower file uploads or task execution, reducing overall work efficiency.
Infrastructure context
Traffic from Central Asia often faces routing limitations. Kazakhstan, for instance, has limited direct connections to Southeast Asia, forcing data to pass through major European hubs like London. This is due to both economic reasons (more favorable transit rates from major operators) and the underdevelopment of regional cable systems.
Indonesia, being an archipelago, also has its own peculiarities. Its international traffic often lands at major exchange points like Singapore or Jakarta before being distributed through domestic networks. However, the lack of direct connections between Kazakhstan and Indonesia via closer hubs (such as Singapore) results in data being routed through distant regions.
Real-world events near the route
In recent months, earthquakes have been recorded near the route, including a magnitude 5.0 event in Kyrgyzstan, just 186 km from Almaty, as well as earthquakes in China and Tajikistan. While these add drama to the geographical context, GeoCables data clearly shows that the detour is solely due to routing decisions, not natural disasters. For example, a magnitude 4.9 earthquake in China two days before the route measurement occurred 422 km from the packet's path and had no impact on its journey.
This case vividly illustrates how infrastructural limitations and routing policies can affect internet performance, creating unexpected challenges for users. GeoCables continues to monitor such routes, providing valuable data to improve global network connectivity.
