However, there may not be a technical case for interconnection. Here inFrom KPNQwest we saw traffic that was 50% national, 30% regional and the rest US based. At least for the larger language regions, CH, AT & DE + NO, SE & DK. BE + FR showed similar patterns.
the Netherlands around 45% of all traffic is to the US (this includes
stuff that is only reachable through the US), 45% is domestic and 10% to
the rest of Europe. Obviously these aren't very hard figures, but each
time I checked it was pretty close. Under these circumstances it doesn'tActually this is most likely the largest network mistakes made. KQ was one of few operators who actually could move traffic on the same DWDM systems inside a language region in Europe. This helped us a lot with designing our IP network. I know other carriers that had to send traffic from Stockholm to Oslo via Amsterdam. That does not scale.
make much sense for non-huge networks to have direct connections to
neighboring countries: reserving some extra capacity on the US link
makes much more sense as it is virtually free, no extra effort and
better burstability. Now recompute with much higher costs for links to
neighboring countries and lots of government intervention.
In the US there isn't much local interconnection as not much traffic stays local. In most other countries, much more traffic stays local
Huh?
because the countries are usually simply smaller and because of language
barriers. So now we have examples with little local interconnection and
examples with little regional interconnection. I'm still waiting for
examples of significant internet use with no local OR regional
interconnection
See Joes India/Nepal example.
Not that any of this is of practical importance with regard to the decisions we are facing.
It will/might impact routing models. - kurtis -