In article , Fred E. Pate
wrote:
As far as I understand, the important thing is that each ARTCC computer has
to be able to draw a course line through its airspace. So the line has to
begin and end at fixes that it recognizes. Otherwise you get a re-route. If
you file to/from high-altitude VOR's you should be good to go. And I am
guessing that each ARTCC computer recognizes all the VORs and many of the
airports in the adjacent center's airspace. So going from Oakland Center to
Seattle Center should not require any extra fixes.

Maybe... maybe not.
When I flew from Brunswick GA to West Palm Beach FL last December, I
filed Victor Airways the entire route, including enroute VOR's.
ATC attempted to amend my clearance as soon as I picked it up. I
declined the amendment and received "cleared as filed".
Each controller down the line in succession then tried to get me to
accept an amended clearance, each time I declined. Finally, one of the
JAX sector controllers explained that the computer would not accept my
routing.
The routing they kept trying to get me to accept would have taken me to
an intersection 15 miles offshore northeast of PBI, hence may refusal
to accept. I had deliberately inserted the phrase "no offshore routing
accepted, no floatation gear on board" in the remarks section of my
flight plan.
After refusing the amendment from the MIA controller, she tried to get
to fly a heading (coincidentally, the same as the airway to the
offshore intersection) which I also refused.
I finally did accept a vector from the PBI final approach controller to
parallel the shoreline about one mile offshore as I was being vectored
to final.