[DMM] [Errata Verified] RFC6275 (5083)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 08 February 2023 05:43 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E0CC14CE52; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 21:43:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.948
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.948 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N4Eg3bxbm6Hu; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 21:43:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfc-editor.org [50.223.129.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9FB5C14CEFC; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 21:43:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 678F755A37; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 21:43:36 -0800 (PST)
To: swmike@swm.pp.se, charliep@computer.org, dbj@cs.rice.edu, jari.arkko@ericsson.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: ek.ietf@gmail.com, iesg@ietf.org, dmm@ietf.org, iana@iana.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20230208054336.678F755A37@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2023 21:43:36 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmm/uOLOtOUNO2Qyw47wGkcJ-vXYiq8>
Subject: [DMM] [Errata Verified] RFC6275 (5083)
X-BeenThere: dmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Distributed Mobility Management Working Group <dmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmm/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm>, <mailto:dmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 05:43:40 -0000
The following errata report has been verified for RFC6275, "Mobility Support in IPv6". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5083 -------------------------------------- Status: Verified Type: Editorial Reported by: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Date Reported: 2017-08-10 Verified by: Erik Kline (IESG) Section: GLOBAL Original Text ------------- Corrected Text -------------- Notes ----- Section 7.2 of RFC6275 introduces a new flag, called the R bit. This seems to update RFC 4861 section 4.6.2. However, there is no mention in RFC6275 or in RFC4861 that this happened. --- Notes --- Thanks for (ahem) flagging this. RFC 8425 was produced to create an IANA registry of PIO flags and formally update RFC 4861. -------------------------------------- RFC6275 (draft-ietf-mext-rfc3775bis-13) -------------------------------------- Title : Mobility Support in IPv6 Publication Date : July 2011 Author(s) : C. Perkins, Ed., D. Johnson, J. Arkko Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Mobility EXTensions for IPv6 Area : Internet Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [DMM] [Errata Verified] RFC6275 (5083) RFC Errata System