[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

"authority" to route?



Another big-name-big-$$$ vendor whose name begins with "C".  Sounds like 
a "c"onspiracy to me............

On 11/14/2012 5:09 PM, Mark Gauvin wrote:
> Careful though cause the crayons must be crayola approved
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2012-11-14, at 5:28 PM, "joel jaeggli" <joelja at bogus.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/14/12 2:40 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
>>> On 2012-11-12, at 14:43, Jim Mercer <jim at reptiles.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a common practice of providers to vet / validate requests to advertise
>>>> blocks?
>>> Yes, most providers whose customers request a particular route to be pointed towards them will ask for ambiguous instructions, written on letterhead with crayon, and signed illegibly by someone who may or may not have authority to do so but who in any case cannot be identified clearly by their scrawl.
>> Some providers ask for route objects and appropriate import/export
>> policy in RADB. that fandamently no higher quality an attestation than a
>> LOA but it's a lot easier to read.
>>> Ideally the letterhead should be crudely constructed in photoshop and then faxed across a noisy analogue line.
>>>
>>> Once you have one of those babies in your file, no lawyer can touch you.
>>>
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>