Re: FW: more specific routes in today reality

[Sabrina Waschke <]

The role of the RIPE NCC in this matter is to simply point out the
different options, so that network operators can take them into
account when requesting address space. It is the ISPs that decide what
gets routed. The RIPE NCC has no influence on this. We will continue
to assign PI address space unless the RIPE community revises this
policy.

However, if there are clear recommendations from the community, the
RIPE NCC will certainly make these recommendations known to its
members.

Kind regards,
Sabrina Waschke

-- 

o------------------------------------------o
| Sabrina Waschke         sabrina@localhost |
| Registration Services Operations Manager |
|                                          |
| RIPE NCC             tel +31 20 535 4444 |
| www.ripe.net         fax +31 20 535 4445 |
o------------------------------------------o

 "Koepp, Karsten" <Karsten.Koepp@localhost writes:
 * 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...
 *