Again (to be clear on the subject), we are not trying to "solve" anything, nor are we advocating for or against anything. We are looking into possible ways to use existing systems for new purposes that may be beneficial to the community.
For example, ROA + ASPA has the ability to help secure routing end-to-end. This may or may not eliminate the need for IRR objects, however it's way too early to tell and still requires a lot more work. Regards, Christopher Hawker On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 at 23:05, Darren Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > Transit providers normally build a prefix list from the data in the ripe > database, in 25+ years I have never been asked for a LOA other than cross > connects and even that is rare. I think you are trying to solve an issue > that doesn’t exist > > > Regards > Darren > > > Sent from Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef> > ------------------------------ > *From:* uknof <[email protected]> on behalf of Christopher > Hawker <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 26, 2023 10:03:11 AM > *To:* Martin Hannigan <[email protected]> > *Cc:* [email protected] <[email protected]>; James Bensley < > [email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [uknof] Your Input Needed: Can ROA Replace LOA? – Short > Survey (7 mins) > > Some people who received this message don't often get email from > [email protected]. Learn why this is important > <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Orbital Internet Group. Do > not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and > know the content is safe. > > In my experience dealing with cross-connect LOAs at Equinix SY1/2, SY3, > SY4, SY5 and ME1, Equinix have always requested an LoA from the Z-side. > Never heard of an LoA not being required for a cross-connect otherwise, how > would they know it's a legit request? However, cross-connect LoAs are > beyond the scope of this topic. > > I've also only seen this with smaller customers requesting their upstreams > allow the route through their filters. If upstreams don't ask, how do they > validate you (or your customer) have the authority to originate the prefix? > I understand there comes a point where a T1 network has to accept any route > that is advertised to it, however, ROAs (and ASPA when it becomes > mainstream) I believe can help secure routing, even at a T1 level. > > Regards, > Christopher Hawker > > On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 at 10:49, Martin Hannigan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Im sailing past 30 years (like a few others here!) and I’ve only had to do > this twice. Never for cross connects. Data centers wouldn’t want to hold > up a cross connect fee. > > HTH > > Warm regards, > > -M< > > > > On Mon, Dec 25, 2023 at 05:42 James Bensley via uknof < > [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. > >
