FW: more specific routes in today reality
- Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:55:01 +0100
Nurani,
I was missing a RIPE NCC hostmaster statement to this e-mail.
Sascha quoted a hostmaster.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sascha E. Pollok [ ]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 12:33 PM
> To: Gert Doering; Vladimir A. Jakovenko
>; routing-wg@localhost
> Subject: Re: more specific routes in today reality
<SNIP>
>
> "- If PI is requested for multi-homing please explain why
> the second
> provider cannot route PA space as a more specific
> route (with the
> PA block holder adding a more specific route too)."
>
> This was suggested from a RIPE NCC Hostmaster when sending a
> PI-space req. This looks a little contrary to your opinion doesn't
> it?
>
> Sascha
>
Has this been a mistake, or is this the default answer to PI requests
sent to the NCC nowadays? Is the NCC seriously going to recommend this
to the members?
I don't recommend the use of PI to customers either, and I don't want
to roll up the multi-homing discussion. But PI should remain provider-
independent and PA should remain provider-aggregatable.
Regards Karsten
Sorry for the late posting in this thread...
|