Re: [CCAMP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7139 (3946)

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Wed, 02 April 2014 20:07 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A24B1A03C8 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:07:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.783
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.783 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.77, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NRNeJiOMQVEb for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:07:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12B81A03C3 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s32K7Fmi026306; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 21:07:15 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (13.17.90.92.rev.sfr.net [92.90.17.13]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s32K79HS026268 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 21:07:12 +0100
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <ccamp@ietf.org>
References: <20140402182502.3651C7FC3A9@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140402182502.3651C7FC3A9@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 21:07:09 +0100
Message-ID: <065201cf4eaf$24703350$6d5099f0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQGvn4ESKC6VPkiP76ahbhWPpDS1CJs+Hg+g
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1017-20604.007
X-TM-AS-Result: No--11.636-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--11.636-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: VfovoVrt/oZNlZ1zEcyAY8OvQCMFyZ9GXEjKf9fhKacY0A95tjAn+3/2 0wqGUabSTWLw2jvbfpzEbH4XLxZSlkdVNEq2uNytIyvp1AQXH8tflOpBqBHTtwmFyye34fhnJMJ XDJjkqdRb3kUSgLz2HDQu/7f/3QY/g/0Lro8de15PuMJi/ZAk8aIn2WK9NEN8a0TOsL14A2n6Gd DqlJQ229InOZzevFRlLOE2D7Ypt/PDIITgRfyIw8tfHufnayoG+q1Y+/eEArZElaZ44wdr5Kqzk p9jrnbPOqSYrjLEabORk6XtYogiarQ/aqQZTRfKVnRXm1iHN1bEQdG7H66TyH4gKq42LRYkMM3y vqBdvuCGnMwkfj4ds6FPLXD/2w+JV2U0tuEGGnJ+3BndfXUhXQ==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/ON6EFzcQmyFEYXxpJCpwOKtnUkA
Cc: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn, sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it, akatlas@gmail.com, dbrungard@att.com
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7139 (3946)
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 20:07:35 -0000

CCAMP,

For this one to be an erratum, I need to know that the use of ResvErr was not
actually intended. If it is actually a typo, we can probably handle it through
the errata system. If, on the other the WG actually intended to use ResvErr,
then this is a change of significant substance.

Thanks,
Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: RFC Errata System [mailto:rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org]
> Sent: 02 April 2014 19:25
> To: zhangfatai@huawei.com; zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn;
> sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it; daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com;
> kpithewan@infinera.com; akatlas@gmail.com; adrian@olddog.co.uk;
> lberger@labn.net; dbrungard@att.com
> Cc: fred.gruman@us.fujitsu.com; ccamp@ietf.org; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
> Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7139 (3946)
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7139,
> "GMPLS Signaling Extensions for Control of Evolving G.709 Optical Transport
> Networks".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7139&eid=3946
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Fred Gruman <fred.gruman@us.fujitsu.com>
> 
> Section: 7
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> After decreasing the bandwidth, the ingress node
> SHOULD send a ResvErr message to tear down the old control state.
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> After decreasing the bandwidth, the ingress node
> SHOULD send a PathTear message to tear down the old control state.
> 
> Notes
> -----
> PathTear is the usual mechanism to teardown old control state. This is would
also
> make the bandwidth decreasing procedure consistent with the bandwidth
> increasing procedure (bandwidth increasing procedure uses PathTear to
> teardown old control state.)
> 
> 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.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC7139 (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : GMPLS Signaling Extensions for Control of Evolving G.709
Optical
> Transport Networks
> Publication Date    : March 2014
> Author(s)           : F. Zhang, Ed., G. Zhang, S. Belotti, D. Ceccarelli, K.
Pithewan
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Common Control and Measurement Plane
> Area                : Routing
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG