@Schwaby -- this really should be expected.
Those experts talking about BC's "atmospheric rivers" have been saying "once in one hundred years", and how climate change is forcing them to reconsider that "1-in-100" is becoming too-long a period of time.
> the consumer Internet service from Telus has been unaffected.
A stroke of luck ? A flip of a coin?
Or, maybe, the Bell/Telus fiber-optic cables have been laid along a different path -- a path that has not been damaged.
Maybe, Telus has some cross-border links (Vancouver -> Bellingham -> Idaho -> Calgary --> Edmonton ???) that are carrying the traffic?
> implement some "creative routing rules" which prioritizes real-time traffic
Is it factual to report that they are not already doing so?
While fiber-optic cables are fast-as-light, it is the routers that get more expensive, the more Gigabits/second that they have to route. Shaw needs a "bigger" router in Calgary than they need in Okotoks. 🙂
Actually, it's not the routing that would change, when wanting to give priority to real-time traffic. Google-search for "packet-shaping networking hardware" to see how this technology examines every packet, classifying the type of traffic, and prioritizing the traffic over one "hop".
> we would only consider a ping exceeding 100 ms within our network to be problematic
I have never seen that much latency within Shaw's own network. Of course, when Shaw interconnects to non-Shaw networks, and some of those networks add latency, there is nothing that Shaw can do for that non-Shaw network, except to liaise with those other network providers (in the USA?). If you traceroute to a web-site in People's Republic of China, you definitely will see greater-than-100-ms numbers.
