FW: more specific routes in today reality

Nurani,

I was missing a RIPE NCC hostmaster statement to this e-mail.
Sascha quoted a hostmaster.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sascha E. Pollok [mailto:sp at iphh.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 12:33 PM
> To: Gert Doering; Vladimir A. Jakovenko
> Cc: lir-wg at ripe.net; routing-wg at ripe.net
> 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...