<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">I agree wit what Randy says as far as that example goes.<div><br></div><div>OTOH, I do think that it is reasonable for ROA to be a valid way to avoid the need to submit LoA for prefix announcement…</div><div><br></div><div>If you have a ROA that already attests AS FOO to be a valid originator for prefix X:Y;Z::/48, then there’s no reason a peer</div><div>needs an additional piece of paper saying essentially the same thing in order to accept your route.</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Nov 15, 2023, at 18:54, Aftab Siddiqui <aftab.siddiqui@gmail.com> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div dir="ltr">Thanks Randy, yes I read that paragraph and found it accurate in terms of business decisions, no technology can trump that :) but still wants to understand if these decisions are based on certain legal practices or just because its been happening like this. <div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Regards,<br><br>Aftab A. Siddiqui</div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 at 13:33, Randy Bush via sanog <<a href="mailto:sanog@sanog.org">sanog@sanog.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">you may find rfc 9255 helpful in this regard, particularly the third<br>
prargraph of the intro<br>
<br>
It has been suggested that one could authenticate real-world business<br>
transactions with the signatures of INR holders. For example, Bill's<br>
Bait and Sushi (BB&S) could use the private key attesting to that<br>
they are the holder of their AS in the RPKI to sign a Letter of<br>
Authorization (LOA) for some other party to rack and stack hardware<br>
owned by BB&S. Unfortunately, while this may be technically<br>
possible, it is neither appropriate nor meaningful.<br>
<br>
<br>
randy<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
sanog mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:sanog@sanog.org" target="_blank">sanog@sanog.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.sanog.org/mailman/listinfo/sanog" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.sanog.org/mailman/listinfo/sanog</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net/<br>To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-talk-leave@lists.apnic.net</div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>