Home
Explore Cables Locations Map My path ISP status Country resilience Check my connection
Live Network radar Live Map Cable monitoring Events log Cable incidents Big screen
Learn Research Guide Methodology Latency Overland links Deployments by year Pulse Open dataset API Widgets What's new About Contact
All articles
Route Analysis

Why Internet Traffic Takes the Long Way: The Rostov-Guam Routing Puzzle

Singapore, SG: the hub the traffic detours through

Imagine this: you send a request from Rostov-on-Don to Guam, a small island in the western Pacific Ocean. You might expect the path through submarine cables to be direct, but instead, your traffic takes a staggering detour through Singapore, adding nearly 4,700 kilometers to the route. As a result, the round-trip time (RTT) reaches an impressive 417 milliseconds, almost four times the physically possible minimum of 100 milliseconds for the direct distance of 10,007 km. What happened?

🇷🇺Rostov-on-Don2 ms→🇷🇺Moscow21 ms→🇸🇪Stockholm64 ms→🇩🇪Frankfurt am Main85 ms→🇫🇷Paris74 ms→🇸🇬Singapore222 ms→🇯🇵Tokyo379 ms→🇬🇺Apra Harbor417 ms
Direct ~10 007 km · actual ~22 430 km · ×2.2

Key Transit Operators and the Routing Puzzle

On the journey from Rostov to Guam, the traffic passes through the networks of several major global transit operators: Arelion (formerly Telia Carrier, AS1299), JSC ER-Telecom Holding (AS57378), and the local operator in Guam, PTI Pacifica Inc. (AS7131). Arelion is one of the largest players in the global data transmission market, providing intercontinental connectivity through an extensive network of backbone cables. JSC ER-Telecom, in turn, handles domestic routing within Russia, forwarding traffic to international nodes. PTI Pacifica Inc. manages networks in Guam, receiving traffic through nodes in Apra Harbor.

Why was the route so complex? The main reasons are the lack of direct interconnections between certain networks and the economic logic of transit. International operators like Arelion often optimize routes for network load, cost savings, or existing stable peering agreements, leading to traffic passing through major hubs like Singapore. Despite its strategic location, Guam has limited direct connectivity infrastructure with Russia, making such detours unavoidable.

Practical Implications for Users

A delay of 417 milliseconds is more than just a number. For users, it translates into tangible inconveniences:

  • Video calls: A delay of over 300 ms is noticeable as pauses and lags during conversations, making communication feel less natural.
  • Online gaming: Gamers face significant challenges. In shooters or strategy games, a 400 ms delay makes it impossible to respond accurately to opponents' actions.
  • Financial trading: Response time is critical, especially when working with stock exchanges or automated trading systems. Delays can lead to missed opportunities.
  • Cloud services: Long response times when working with remote data storage or applications reduce productivity.

Why Does Regional Traffic Take "the Wrong Path"?

Infrastructure characteristics play a key role in routing. In the region where Rostov is located, there are nodes of major international operators, such as in Moscow and Stockholm, which serve as "gateways" for intercontinental traffic. However, direct routes to Guam are not available because backbone cables pass through other hubs like Singapore. This is due to historical cable layouts and economic agreements between operators.

Singapore, for instance, is one of the world's largest connectivity hubs, where peering between operators reaches its peak. Traffic passing through this region is often rerouted for optimization, which increases the journey length. GeoCables' analysis revealed that routing decisions, rather than physical events in the region, were the cause of this detour.

Real-World Events: The Background of Routing

It is important to note that the traffic route was not influenced by recent natural or social events in the area. For example, two days ago, an earthquake with a magnitude of 5.4 occurred 199 kilometers from Guam. However, GeoCables data confirms that this event did not impact the cable infrastructure. Similarly, recent floods in Russia, Ukraine, and Georgia were recorded along the route, but they did not cause changes in data paths.

Nevertheless, such events serve as a reminder of the importance of global network resilience. Submarine cables passing through areas prone to natural disasters or conflict zones are often vulnerable. This underscores the need for additional investments in backup infrastructure and more flexible routing to ensure reliable connectivity.

Conclusion

The case of the Rostov-to-Guam route is a vivid example of how the global communication network operates in real-time, facing numerous infrastructural, economic, and technical challenges. As long as direct connections remain unavailable, users will continue to experience increased delays. GeoCables continues to investigate such cases, uncovering the intricate paths of traffic and helping to understand how to improve the global network for everyone. Every detour is a story behind the numbers and a step toward a more efficient and reliable digital infrastructure.

Evgeny Korolev
Written by
Evgeny Korolev
Infrastructure Engineer · Founder of GeoCables
Built GeoCables to monitor submarine cables in real time. Runs his own distributed network of measurement servers, including in regions poorly covered by public internet measurements.

Log In

Access your routes, favorites, and API key

Create account Forgot password?