[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5420 (1689)
- To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be, jpv@cisco.com, arthi@juniper.net, rcallon@juniper.net, dward@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, dbrungard@att.com
- Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5420 (1689)
- From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 04:34:33 -0800 (PST)
- Cc: ah@TR-Sys.de, ccamp@ops.ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5420,
"Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)".
--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5420&eid=1689
--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Alfred Hoenes <ah@TR-Sys.de>
Section: 11.3, pg.19
Original Text
-------------
a)
The IANA has created a new registry and will manage the space of
| attributes bit flags, numbering them in the usual IETF notation:
^
starting at zero and continuing at least through 31.
b)
Each bit should be tracked with the following qualities:
- Bit number
- Defining RFC
- Name of bit
| - Whether there is meaning in the Attribute Flags TLV on a Path
| - Whether there is meaning in the Attribute Flags TLV on a Resv
- Whether there is meaning in the RRO Attributes subobject
Corrected Text
--------------
a)
The IANA has created a new registry and will manage the space of
attribute bit flags, numbering them in the usual IETF notation:
starting at zero and continuing at least through 31.
b)
Each bit should be tracked with the following qualities:
- Bit number
- Defining RFC
- Name of bit
| - Whether there is meaning in the Attribute Flags TLV on a Path message
| - Whether there is meaning in the Attribute Flags TLV on a Resv message
- Whether there is meaning in the RRO Attributes subobject
Notes
-----
Rationale:
a) grammar fix in the body of RFC 5420 vs. RFC 4420
should also be reflected in the IANA Considerations
(and in the IANA registry -- subject to independent report to IANA);
b) language improvement applied in the body of the RFC
should also be reflected in the IANA Considerations.
Instructions:
-------------
This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
--------------------------------------
RFC5420 (draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc4420bis-03)
--------------------------------------
Title : Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)
Publication Date : February 2009
Author(s) : A. Farrel, Ed., D. Papadimitriou, JP. Vasseur, A. Ayyangarps
Category : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source : Common Control and Measurement Plane
Area : Routing
Stream : IETF
Verifying Party : IESG