Dear Colleagues, how exactly is this meaning of MNT-ROUTES in AUT-NUM objects in case of routes object creation/modification ? RFC2725 is not realy detailed here. Means the existance of an MNT-ROUTES attribute in an AUT-NUM object that ONLY this/these referenced maintainer(s) will be able to authorized route creation/modification and the referenced MNT-BY maintainer(s) will not be used? Or should not the MNT-BY maintainer(s) checked if all MNT-ROUTES maintainer(s) authorisation fails? The current RIPE software checks MNT-ROUTES maintainers only. Thanks Frank

...

From: "Frank Bohnsack" <Frank.Bohnsack@deu.mci.com> Subject: LONGACK Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:42:06 +0200 Reply-To: Frank.Bohnsack@deu.mci.com Message-ID: <FAEKJBKGENGFILMMECELOEHICAAA.Frank.Bohnsack@deu.mci.com>

...

DETAILED EXPLANATION:

***Warning: Invalid keyword(s) found: LONGACK ***Warning: All keywords were ignored

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The following object(s) were found to have ERRORS:

--- Create FAILED: [route] 139.8.32.0/24AS702 ***Error: Authorisation failed ***Info: Syntax check passed

route: 139.8.32.0/24 descr: DE PI route origin: AS702 member-of: AS702:RS-DE, AS702:RS-DE-PI, AS702:RS-DE-PULLUP mnt-by: WCOM-EMEA-RICE-MNT changed: rice@lists.mci.com 20030804 source: RIPE

***Info: Authorisation for parent [route] 139.8.0.0/16AS702 using mnt-by: authenticated by: WCOM-EMEA-RICE-MNT

***Info: Authorisation for origin [aut-num] AS702 using mnt-routes: not authenticated by: UUNETDK-MNT, AS1270-MNT, AS1849-MNT, AS1890-MNT, IWAY-NOC, AS702-MNT, SE-UUNET-MNT, UUNETDE-I

***Info: Authorisation for [route] 139.8.32.0/24AS702 using mnt-by: authenticated by: WCOM-EMEA-RICE-MNT

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For assistance or clarification please contact: RIPE Database Administration <ripe-dbm@ripe.net>