[CCAMP] [Errata Rejected] RFC8632 (5953)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 13 July 2020 21:14 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3495E3A1109; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:14:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0lVYAZQ9MB99; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 130A93A0EF4; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:13:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id CADE7F4074C; Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
To: te.hasegawa2@gmail.com, stefan@wallan.se, mbj@tail-f.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: db3546@att.com, iesg@ietf.org, ccamp@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20200713211351.CADE7F4074C@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/wzF_tcQmUAzCUhvFOmposwn5hok>
Subject: [CCAMP] [Errata Rejected] RFC8632 (5953)
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 21:15:01 -0000

The following errata report has been rejected for RFC8632,
"A YANG Data Model for Alarm Management".

You may review the report below and at:

Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial

Reported by: Tetsuya Hasegawa <te.hasegawa2@gmail.com>
Date Reported: 2019-12-31
Rejected by: Deborah Brungard (IESG)

Section: 3.5.1.

Original Text
   From a resource perspective, an alarm can, for example, have the
   following lifecycle: raise, change severity, change severity, clear,

Corrected Text
   From a resource perspective, an alarm can, for example, have the
   following lifecycle: raise, change severity, clear,


 Per authors and chairs, the current RFC text is correct as it exemplifies how the severity can change multiple times over the lifecycle of an alarm.

RFC8632 (draft-ietf-ccamp-alarm-module-09)
Title               : A YANG Data Model for Alarm Management
Publication Date    : September 2019
Author(s)           : S. Vallin, M. Bjorklund
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Common Control and Measurement Plane
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG