[Idr] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC4456 (3778)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 31 October 2013 11:18 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CAFC21E80C4; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 04:18:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.457
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.457 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.143, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id frDhwH1JUaDr; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 04:18:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A89921E80CB; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 04:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 514D062187; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 04:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
To: ramakrishnadtv@infosys.com, tbates@cisco.com, enkechen@cisco.com, rchandra@sonoasystems.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20131031110949.514D062187@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 04:09:49 -0700
Cc: idr@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC4456 (3778)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 11:18:57 -0000
The following errata report has been held for document update for RFC4456, "BGP Route Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP (IBGP)". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4456&eid=3778 -------------------------------------- Status: Held for Document Update Type: Editorial Reported by: Ramakrishna DTV <ramakrishnadtv@infosys.com> Date Reported: 2013-10-30 Held by: Stewart Bryant (IESG) Section: 5 Original Text ------------- The Non-Client peer must be fully meshed but the Client peers need not be fully meshed. Corrected Text -------------- The Non-Client peers must be fully meshed but the Client peers need not be fully meshed. Notes ----- This is a typo. Figure 4 shows multiple Non-Client peers. But the text is referring to "The Non-Client peer". It should be "The Non-Client peers". -------------------------------------- RFC4456 (draft-ietf-idr-rfc2796bis-02) -------------------------------------- Title : BGP Route Reflection: An Alternative to Full Mesh Internal BGP (IBGP) Publication Date : April 2006 Author(s) : T. Bates, E. Chen, R. Chandra Category : DRAFT STANDARD Source : Inter-Domain Routing Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Idr] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC4456 (… RFC Errata System
- [Idr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC4456 (3778) RFC Errata System