Re: "authority" to route?

[Robert Glover <robertg () garlic com>]

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 () bogus com> wrote:
>
> > On 11/14/12 2:40 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
> > > 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.
> > 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