Re: [Idr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8092 (4962)

Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 10 March 2017 03:03 UTC

Return-Path: <ibagdona.ietf@gmail.com>
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 B9D5C129530 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 19:03:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 G0qqz7Y2ARY0 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 19:03:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr0-x241.google.com (mail-wr0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E720E12953D for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 19:03:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr0-x241.google.com with SMTP id u48so10050203wrc.1 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 19:03:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=H5ManzjaYhwqiFy5rApbjIuiZbMJvX8eJlE1+XEVs7E=; b=bltK0lXJMSUKxHZeEt95762g19mc8TV6qOuZdPB6yDCFAZeXdONlI+5WHmgEkmfVfO xfhPr5QwqvdaYAqqjgSDsM4+LhFwxBT4vW3ZMaxgSx0yPhxi9XWXwKCourmfx0OUobX6 Hs/LMOp1GSDXvtkAvifmwWUvtnGs3LBgyWdy0EuaZX2uS/VDNNM+tddf4y32kV3GytJ8 Tk0/zQvVX6cvQ02YV1dNBSnrTkZPR5pvf2TLd0f/5ileuQ0amqEJ6LblNr4cnfmODp6Q +p96iavaK5q1C8mhPxiMfAOdSIBPOefzVcVeimMtlZEy1CPol4kJVbe0SA9zBz6j4NNx ge1w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=H5ManzjaYhwqiFy5rApbjIuiZbMJvX8eJlE1+XEVs7E=; b=tO4I7PkjUEG45wgVtFJ0MBdq29C0qCKHJoTpKAtcGh4am02fwaD7AL3ussjRq5X9HZ GF4FFbez/c8RMTdLeKv4QPYTvm/7iF1yBoXB+/eW6t6NtrBpQ4PZqdRQMS1UGp85IgcW kgu6X0fJqw9OZXDxSyzaxNFFcd+1UCZL6TfuNJjkvZvDZgu0167qfT3brvhuxZBk4AgX 1CgHA1dEjUYfjcbiED/9ADLqp65OfT1Bc2KOET9EORTqO3Wp/yMPGjknPHsxuFgopwco 8mrGTzDHK55HUXT7FvBvKPvVcdYoJkeW7tUtSqMR9fP4x29VS1lSdPHADYJ5kw5DU0zW 4XNw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39m9B2jTrqUdldLB1RA0eJVdTVWuOguiJuPL3Ozkuus2gpJvjOxwpgGctOBoZpM+YQ==
X-Received: by 10.223.179.216 with SMTP id x24mr12731152wrd.171.1489098918657; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:35:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.191.246] ([80.69.10.100]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p93sm9857967wrc.67.2017.03.09.14.35.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:35:17 -0800 (PST)
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, jheitz@cisco.com, job@ntt.net, keyur@arrcus.com, nick@inex.ie, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, jgs@juniper.net, shares@ndzh.com
References: <20170309152156.5956BB80EB2@rfc-editor.org>
From: Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0be5014c-4145-6430-2b3c-14b2beb8d153@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 22:35:16 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170309152156.5956BB80EB2@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/LrLxqoQpfT57X4kHf-xzvDpHnMM>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 12:01:44 -0800
Cc: idr@ietf.org, nmalykh@gmail.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8092 (4962)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 03:03:46 -0000

Hi there,

If the intention of the errata is to address the handling of duplicated 
large community attributes (i.e., multiple type 32 attributes present in 
UPDATE message) then it does not seem to be right. RFC7606 does not 
allow to have more than one meaningful attribute of the same type in a 
single UPDATE message, therefore the literal interpretation of "BGP 
Large Communities" attribute does not apply as only the first such 
attribute gets interpreted and all subsequent ones get ignored. RFC8092 
has both singular and plural form of term "large community" values used 
in different contexts, referring to either a single 12 octet large 
community value or to a whole large communities attribute.


Ignas


On 09/03/2017 15:21, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8092,
> "BGP Large Communities Attribute".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=8092&eid=4962
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Nikolai Malykh <nmalykh@gmail.com>
>
> Section: 3
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>     Duplicate BGP Large Community values MUST NOT be transmitted.  A
>     receiving speaker MUST silently remove redundant BGP Large Community
>     values from a BGP Large Community attribute.
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>     Duplicate BGP Large Community values MUST NOT be transmitted.  A
>     receiving speaker MUST silently remove redundant BGP Large Community
>     values from a BGP Large Communities attribute.
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> Typo
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8092 (draft-ietf-idr-large-community-12)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : BGP Large Communities Attribute
> Publication Date    : February 2017
> Author(s)           : J. Heitz, Ed., J. Snijders, Ed., K. Patel, I. Bagdonas, N. Hilliard
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Inter-Domain Routing
> Area                : Routing
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG