About RIPE | Contact  | Search | Sitemap    
Homepage RIPE  
RIPE Community Mail Archives
search  
     
RIPE Navigation Ends
About RIPE Maillists
Maillists Archive
Global Lists
Non Active Lists
RIPE NCC Navigation Ends
Next Section
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

FW: more specific routes in today reality

  • To: "'nurani@localhost" < >
  • From: "Koepp, Karsten" < >
  • Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:55:01 +0100
  • Cc: "'lir-wg@localhost" < >

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...

  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>
 

Next Section
     About RIPE | Site Map | LIR Portal | About the RIPE NCC | Contact | Copyright Statement
RIPE.NET Homepage LIR Portal RIPE Community