Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec
    Posts
    589

    * Is UUNET supposed to have good peering ??

    Hi,
    I'm in montreal, Quebec and I was considering buying a dedicated server in UUNET's Toronto datacenter to get good pings.

    My ISP has connections to Qwest and Sprint in montreal and to Cable & Wireless in Toronto but my packets are getting bumped to New-York, then Washington and then Toronto.

    Does that mean that neither Qwest, Sprint or Cable & Wireless peers with UUNET in Montreal or Toronto ???

    I find this really strange

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec
    Posts
    589
    Here is a mapview of a traceroute with neotrace.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails tracert.gif  

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    4,962
    Thats actually pretty good.. With some other providers you might bounce off the west cost then back to the easy cost then to your destination


    It doesn't mean UUnet doesn't have a line between Montreal or Toronto, it just means that your currently using the fastest connection between them.. It can change...
    -Mat Sumpter
    Director, Product Engagement
    Penton Media

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec
    Posts
    589
    OK, but I'm geeting 50ms ping wich is not very good for Toronto. I getting a greater ping a FDCservers

    Isn't BGP supposed to choose the shortest route ? If UUNET had a link between montreal and toronto, shoudn't this way have less hops ?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    383

    Exclamation

    First of all, UUnet isn't the company that is once was. Don't believe everything you hear.

    Next, the problem isn't so much with UUnet as it is the fact that you are in Canada.

    The reason bandwidth is so cheap in the US is the massive fiber glut along with intense competition in the industry.

    Not only do you not have anywhere near the capacity available as in the US you also have a telco monopoly (BCE/BellNexxia).

    Finally, the Canadian dollar's poor value compared to the US dollar is a further hinderance to foreign investment.

    The solution for most small Canadian ISPs (or American ISPs doing business in .ca) is to buy transit to American exchance points in Chicago or New York.

    Solution: Lease a server in the US!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec
    Posts
    589
    Band width is not SO expensive anymore in Canada. I mean, compared to what it used to be. 5 years ago, I got quoted 1400$ CAN / mbit in UUNET datacenter. Now you can get a T1 from BellNexxia for 1000$ CAN but their bandwidth sucks.

    The only viable solution here is Peer1.net at around 300$ USD / mbit if you commit for a bit more than 10mbit.

    I'll think I'll have no choice but to get a server in USA but I need good ping. I have found 125$ / mbit in aleron datacenter (around 30ms ping). Anybody knows a good place to colo on the east cost near Canada (sub 30ms ping) for cheaper than 125$ / mbit ?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,963
    50ms is good IMO, dunno what's the big deal.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    677
    You don't really need sub 30ms ping. It's not really that noticable for most part. And since US is pretty well connected generally, it may not necessarily need to be that near Canada.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,700
    Have you tried a canadian dc? Prioity Colo just opened up in Toronto. They have great prices and are offering some low prices for the new dc. Check them out. You may need to contact them because I am not sure if they have updated the website with the new prices/specs and all.

    http://prioritycolocation.com

    Thanks

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec
    Posts
    589
    Good idea,
    I didn't remember that priority colocation was in Canada.

    Thank you, I'll ask them for a quote.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,700
    Well they are now They recently moved out of the Miami dc and moved into a new one in toronto. Check them out, they really are worth it. Porcupine is a great guy.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec
    Posts
    589
    Do you know what bandwidth providers they use now ? They used to be on cogent but now that they are in Canada, they must have other carriers.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    4,962
    Videotron, Telus, Toronto Hydro, AT&T, BCE, Rogers, 360 Networks, Call-net, and Group telecom.. All over BGP4.. Always nice
    -Mat Sumpter
    Director, Product Engagement
    Penton Media

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    4,962
    http://www.151frontstreet.com/connectivity.html

    Thats where all servers will be housed as far as I know..
    -Mat Sumpter
    Director, Product Engagement
    Penton Media

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,017
    Originally posted by illogix
    OK, but I'm geeting 50ms ping wich is not very good for Toronto. I getting a greater ping a FDCservers

    Isn't BGP supposed to choose the shortest route ? If UUNET had a link between montreal and toronto, shoudn't this way have less hops ?
    bgp chooses the shortest path in consideration of the number of networks transversed... that means... say you have a server in toronto on uunet... and you are on telus in montreal for example... telus and uunet peer in vancouver, but telus peers with shaw in toronto and uunet peers with shaw in toronto... the fastest route would be to go telus (montreal->toronto) -> shaw (toronto) -> uunet (toronto)... but thats more networks transversed than telus (montreal->vancouver) -> uunet (vancouver->toronto)... what u want is technology like internap has... which takes the fastest route, regardless of the number of networks transversed...

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec
    Posts
    589
    Thank you netdude, It's more clear now

    Prohacker: Wow this is a really nice network. We need this server for gameserver hosting and 90% of our clients use Videotron as their ISP. This seems like the right place to put our servers.

    Did you heard of the new pricing of PriorityColocation ? I guest they will raise their price since this is no cogent bandwidth.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,304
    Originally posted by netdude

    what u want is technology like internap has... which takes the fastest route, regardless of the number of networks transversed...
    It *theoretically* takes the "fastest" route. Don't believe everything you read.

    Kevin

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,017
    theoretically, the earth is round...

    but it ain't... its gimped... its kinda oval... lol

    but close enough to round to say its round, won't u say?

    internap has based their ENTIRE business around their technology... its their only market advantage... i don't think they'd lie about that too quick... cuz if it were discovered... what would their advantage be?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,304
    Originally posted by netdude

    internap has based their ENTIRE business around their technology... its their only market advantage... i don't think they'd lie about that too quick... cuz if it were discovered... what would their advantage be?
    I'm not saying anyone's lying! I have plenty of respect for InterNAP as a company ($15M/quarter losses notwithstanding).

    As a network person, however, I'm skeptical of technologies which claim to monitor performance on 140,000 global Internet routes - most shifts in routing topology are either glacial (turning up new peering) or instantaneous (POP outage), and a reasonable monitoring technology wouldn't match either model. By reasonable, I mean something that doesn't annoy other networks and doesn't saturate bandwidth.

    Anyway, when you see AS 10910 prepended, say, seven times in a route announcement, it's more comical than technically impressive ;-)

    Kevin

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,954
    I'll be around to answer questions shortly, if you check the other priority colocation thread, we just completed the move, our site has lowest priority right now for coming back up, but will be up tomorrow. Just completing this move thats been in the planning for the last 5 months almost.

    If you have any questions, feel free to ask. BTW, just because connectivity runs into the building, doesen't mmean we have it lit, we have a nice network, but the building has over 5,000 strands of fiber, 150+ telco's/carriers, and 10+ local fiber providers with diverse routes over 4+ diverse entry points, as much as i'd love to claim we're hooked up to all of them, unfortunatly we are not (nor is anyone else ).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •