Hi Harald, The database checks for matching and less specific routes first. If such a route exists (that's the case here), mnt-routes is required in this route object. And the mntners in the inetnum are being ignored. There was a lenghty discussion about the reasons of this procedure. I don't find that appropriate but maybe others can summarize why not to check the inetnum first. The outcome for me is, that whenever you want to give mnt-routes to somebody else, only do it in a route with your own AS as origin, but that's not applicable for PI. Regards Karsten

-----Original Message----- From: Harald.Singer@tesion.de [mailto:Harald.Singer@tesion.de] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 5:59 PM To: db-wg@ripe.net Subject: Hierarchical authorisation failed, request forwarded to maintaine r ???

Hello,

i have the problem to create a route-object for a customer of me. The customer will transfer his PI-Network (192.109.176.0/24, I´m CNSPLUS-MNT) from another ISP into my AS. And of course a mnt-routes:CNSPLUS-MNT exists. I need to create the new route-object, but i get the error: "Hierarchical authorisation failed, request forwarded to maintainer." I think I should be able to create such an object without assistance from another ISP.

- As the ISP and I are using Crypt-PW I don´t want to send a mail with my password to this ISP (like the proposal from Daniel in this WG).

- Some time ago i was able to create such objects without any assistance, what was the reason to change this behaviour?

- The discussion some weeks ago doesn´t have any hints for a solution, or i missed it.

- Do you have any proposal to create the object?

Regards

Harald

-- Harald Singer Telefon: +49 (0)711/2021-847 tesion )) Telekommunikation Telefax: +49 (0)711/2021-93-847 Systemingenieur / CCIE #7326 Mobil: +49 (0)178/2021-847 Kriegsbergstrasse 11 Mail: harald.singer@tesion.de D-70174 Stuttgart Web: http://www.tesion.de