Hi James, This survey wasn't targeted at larger Tier 1 or similar networks. We acknowledge that not all transit providers request an LoA, and this has been factored into this. Our research is around the viability of replacing LOAs with using ROAs for those who may still use LOAs to prove they are authorised to use prefixes assigned/allocated to them.
I was not the original author of the survey so I can't speak as to why questions were worded the way they were, however, I believe that it was designed to look at the upstream relationship from the customer to the transit provider and the questions worded accordingly. It's not designed to be an exhaustive source of information. Naturally, this would not be usable for legacy IP space that don't have access to RPKI and would have to use LOAs if required, however that's a whole different discussion. Regards, Christopher Hawker P.S. Merry Christmas :) On Mon, 25 Dec 2023 at 21:39, James Bensley <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday, November 27th, 2023 at 05:03, Christopher Hawker < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > Aftab Siddiqui is currently exploring the possibility of using Route > Object Authorisations (ROAs) as a potential replacement to LOAs. > > > > Hi Christopher, > > This survey was sent to the NANOG list and there someone responded saying > that they have been in the service provider world for 10 years and only had > to send a LoA once, with regards to authorisation for IP announcements. > > I have been working in the SP world for 15-ish years and I have worked > with all Tier 1's at different points, and I have never had to send a LoA. > > My only experiences with LoA's is for DC cross-connects (in this context I > have sent and received many). So the survey seems flawed in that the first > question should be something like "do you send and accept LoA's regarding > prefix announcements" because, the survey is based on the assumption that > everyone is using LoAs for this, I think this initial assumption needs > clarifying. > > Cheers, > James. > >
