Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035)

Megan Ferguson <mferguson@amsl.com> Wed, 01 April 2020 15:17 UTC

Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1F39154E-68FC-43F4-B46A-05A1592EA05F"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035)
From: Megan Ferguson <mferguson@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <1E330EE0-0370-4AC0-A459-0C51B0C4FA29@amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 08:17:33 -0700
Cc: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, RFC System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com" <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>, "brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "ek.ietf@gmail.com" <ek.ietf@gmail.com>, "bob.hinden@gmail.com" <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, "otroan@employees.org" <otroan@employees.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <70684538-DA95-41E9-BE28-DA3D0FDC782B@amsl.com>
References: <20200401022511.6AADAF40738@rfc-editor.org> <92B2DA82-8FA4-4751-AFEE-D549ABE3A865@cisco.com> <1a37cfe6-f08d-d6da-498d-66cc7cef4513@si6networks.com> <CAB9A2A2-7398-41D7-BF62-DB6B6CD45297@gmail.com> <1E330EE0-0370-4AC0-A459-0C51B0C4FA29@amsl.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/2B6aWEiGCX3HbDsf0jX1e16N3zk>
Precedence: list

Hi Fernando,

And now I see you’ve already sent with a different subject - sorry!  Copying below to keep in the same thread:

> Hello, RFC-Editor,
> 
> Yesterday I filled Errata 6035 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6035) on RFC 8026.
> 
> However, I realize the erratum contains an error.
> 
> The text
> "And Router A should be employed as the preferred next hop for packets sourced from the prefix 2001:db8::/64, since it advertises the prefix with a non-zero Valid Lifetime and non-zero Preferred Lifetime (as opposed to Router B)."
> 
> should really say:
> 
> "And Router B should be employed as the preferred next hop for packets sourced from the prefix 2001:db8::/64, since it advertises the prefix with a non-zero Valid Lifetime and non-zero Preferred Lifetime (as opposed to Router A)."
> 
> (note that "A" and "B" are swapped.
> 
> Is it possible to correct this in the erratum?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Fernando Gont
> e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com
> PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

We have updated as requested.  

Please review our changes at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6035 (please be sure to refresh) and let us know if any further updates are necessary.

Thank you!

RFC Editor/mf


On Apr 1, 2020, at 8:00 AM, Megan Ferguson <mferguson@amsl.com> wrote:

> Hi Fernando,
> 
> Suresh is right - just send us the Old/New clearly showing your update and I can implement for you.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> RFC Editor/mf
> 
> On Apr 1, 2020, at 6:05 AM, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> They can edit the Erratum in place. No need to file a separate one. Please send them a note with the OLD: and NEW: text.
>

[Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035) RFC Errata System
Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035) Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035) Fernando Gont
Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035) Suresh Krishnan
Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035) Megan Ferguson
Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035) Megan Ferguson
Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8028 (6035) Fred Baker