Re: [CDNi] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8007 (6385)

[Kevin Ma <[e-mail]>]

Hi All,

  I think the reported errata looks like a pretty clear typo.  Do others
agree?

  Note: I noticed that the 3 Errata discussed at IETF 99 never got marked
as verified.  We should update those at the same time we update the status
of this most recent errata.

thanx.

--  Kevin J. Ma

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 5:26 AM RFC Errata System <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8007,
> "Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Control Interface /
> Triggers".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6385
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Guillaume Bichot <[e-mail]>
>
> Section: 4.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>    When a CI/T Trigger Command is accepted, the uCDN MUST create a new
>    Trigger Status Resource that will convey a specification of the CI/T
>    Command and its current status.  The HTTP response to the dCDN MUST
>    have status code 201 and MUST convey the URI of the Trigger Status
>    Resource in the Location header field [RFC7231].
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>    When a CI/T Trigger Command is accepted, the dCDN MUST create a new
>    Trigger Status Resource that will convey a specification of the CI/T
>    Command and its current status.  The HTTP response to the uCDN MUST
>    have status code 201 and MUST convey the URI of the Trigger Status
>    Resource in the Location header field [RFC7231].
>
> Notes
> -----
> There has been an accidental switch between "uCDN" and "dCDN" terms in
> this statement. If my understanding is correct, when the uCDN post a CI/T
> command to the dCDN, the latter must create a trigger status resource and
> returns in the response (HTTP code 201) “Location” header the URI of that
> status resource.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum 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
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8007 (draft-ietf-cdni-control-triggers-15)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI)
> Control Interface / Triggers
> Publication Date    : December 2016
> Author(s)           : R. Murray, B. Niven-Jenkins
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Content Delivery Networks Interconnection
> Area                : Applications and Real-Time
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>