nanog mailing list archives
Re: "authority" to route?
From: Joe Abley <jabley () hopcount ca>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:40:56 -0500
On 2012-11-12, at 14:43, Jim Mercer <jim () 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. 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
Current thread:
- "authority" to route? Jim Mercer (Nov 12)
- Re: "authority" to route? Jimmy Hess (Nov 12)
- Re: "authority" to route? Joe Abley (Nov 14)
- Re: "authority" to route? joel jaeggli (Nov 14)
- Re: "authority" to route? Mark Gauvin (Nov 14)
- Re: "authority" to route? Robert Glover (Nov 14)
- Re: "authority" to route? joel jaeggli (Nov 14)
- RE: "authority" to route? Schiller, Heather A (Nov 15)
- Re: "authority" to route? Kyle Creyts (Nov 15)
- Re: "authority" to route? Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 16)
- Re: "authority" to route? Richard Barnes (Nov 16)
- Re: "authority" to route? Kyle Creyts (Nov 15)