On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:46:08PM -0700, Jacob Slater wrote:
Route objects are not always required. While route objects are generally preferred and should be used, letters of authorization are still in use today. You certainly wouldn't see them in a public database (though you might see objects which claim to be tied to them). Even if you do, they may well be stale and no longer accurate.
In my world, these authorisations are largely informal (phone calls, emails, sometimes personal meetings). The people involved know and trust each other, there is no need for bureaucratic exercises.
Because they have had no valid reason to do so yet. Making it a policy violation doesn't seem like the right way to encourage them to do so. It is not the job of the NCC to tell users how to run their network. As annoying as it is at times, this includes how users choose to authenticate their announcements.
Agreed, and I refuse to accept the NCC's authority to do so. rgds, SL