Re: US/Canada International border concerns for routing

[Dave Cohen <craetdave () gmail com>]

Sorta, kinda. The various ASs operated by Zayo are more interconnected than that description would imply. The 
traditional mode of operation on an "acquired AS" has been to turn down any upstream transit as quickly as 
contractually possible and upgrade NNI capacity between that AS and 6461 to compensate. Over time, legacy devices are 
overbuilt or replaced with ones directly on 6461. The net-net of it is that most traffic will end up egressing to other 
providers via 6461's peering after a fairly short period, although this isn't universally true, especially for "local" 
traffic (e.g. traffic originating on the Neo AS staying in France, etc.). 

Dave Cohen
craetdave () gmail com

> On Aug 8, 2017, at 10:13 PM, Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke () gmail com> wrote:
>
> It is worth noting, however, that the former AllStream ASN (formerly AT&T
> Canada) AS15290 is a completely different thing, and has distinct
> infrastructure and routing from the AboveNet ASN which is operated by Zayo.
> Although they are probably using "Free" Zayo transport by now.
>
> If I am grossly wrong and anybody from layer 3 network operations at Zayo
> wants to chime in and tell us about the 40,000 ft view of their plans to
> combine AS15290 and AS6461, I am sure the community would be very
> interested.
>
> > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Stephen Fulton <sf () lists esoteric ca> wrote:
> >
> > TR,
> >
> > MTS Allstream is no longer a combined entity.  MTS was purchased by Bell
> > Canada and Allstream was purchased by Zayo.
> >
> > -- Stephen
> >
> >
> > > On 2017-08-08 8:19 PM, TR Shaw wrote:
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > What does Bell buying MTS do? Does it change your statement or will the
> > > MTS portion of Bell still peer locally?
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > > On Aug 8, 2017, at 8:10 PM, Bill Woodcock <woody () pch net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Jul 20, 2017, at 7:01 AM, Hiers, David <David.Hiers () cdk com> wrote:
> > > > > For traffic routing, is anyone constraining cross-border routing
> > > > > between Canada and the US?  IOW, if you are routing from Toronto to
> > > > > Montreal, do you have to guarantee that the path cannot go through, say,
> > > > > Syracuse, New York?
> > > >
> > > > No.  In fact, Bell Canada / Bell Aliant and Telus guarantee that you
> > > > _will_ go through Chicago, Seattle, New York, or Ashburn, since none of
> > > > them peer anywhere in Canada at all.
> > > >
> > > > Last I checked (November of last year) the best-connected commercial
> > > > networks (i.e. not CANARIE) in Canada were Hurricane Electric, MTS
> > > > Allstream, Primus, and Zip Telecom, all of which peer at three or more
> > > > Canadian IXes.  So, they’re capable of keeping traffic in Canada so long as
> > > > the other end isn’t on Bell or Telus, which only sell U.S. bandwidth to
> > > > Canadians.
> > > >
> > > > In November, only 27% of intra-Canadian routes stayed within Canada; 64%
> > > > went through the U.S.  That’s way worse than five years ago, when 60%
> > > > stayed within Canada, and 38% went through the U.S.
> > > >
> > > > As has been pointed out, Canada has been building IXPs…  Just not as
> > > > fast as the rest of the world has.  They’re behind the global average
> > > > growth rate, and behind the U.S. growth rate, which is why the problem is
> > > > getting worse.  Bandwidth costs are falling faster elsewhere, so they’re
> > > > importing more foreign bandwidth.
> > > >
> > > >                                -Bill