Re: [L2sm] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8466 (6683)

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 14 September 2021 08:20 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: l2sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B0F93A0EE3 for <l2sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 01:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 7-P_5Qme52lt for <l2sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 01:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta5.iomartmail.com (mta5.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F1B63A0EE1 for <l2sm@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 01:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (vs3.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.124]) by mta5.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 18E89tuM018090; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:09:55 +0100
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id F22504604C; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:09:54 +0100 (BST)
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE9F64604B; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:09:54 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs3.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:09:54 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([84.93.2.143]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 18E89rYM018978 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:09:53 +0100
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'RFC Errata System' <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: l2sm@ietf.org, giuseppe.fioccola@tim.it, xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn, luay.jalil@verizon.com, bin_wen@comcast.com, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
References: <20210914054638.552B5F409A9@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20210914054638.552B5F409A9@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:09:51 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <1aa601d7a93f$e5793a40$b06baec0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQGz7LLGJz/Q2MPvjlVyqsjcjXOOIavqpWRw
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 84.93.2.143
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2034-8.6.0.1018-26406.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--11.357-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--11.357-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2034-8.6.1018-26406.006
X-TMASE-Result: 10--11.356900-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: TmlY9+XBoTnxIbpQ8BhdbMzWN98iBBeGOPTK3QRc4JDfoEW8Nyvnb5uc wbCn9SioRDGDkk97fu0s9UlS3XnHEHItegU8T6xV4t2mucDkRBFPEvlTYRZqW4RYHyK7IaoJyVh aMnMnOpkvYRhsicUjmyaTw03n/wYO0iILwdNxhJI1Pd2wRvpA9x3puAfcyDXJ0r50qUvYHEAlLK kfyH4ze/gbQ2JqKj6W5ASSCWKkZHc9AOF20d7i3we06kQGFaIWVOLMRauooBFZ+YxyNxdzR4opg HeEYgzIa/TjFbR9UETXEBASxXdBD7a0EpV/UcVF3nHtGkYl/Vq5tt/YcLkWjSBQRBOQhaJiqmHW Ijdul9eK4istoRoHQHOhOZypaizSnPecQ/hKOMAdZEkR8Y/meXb4y1hCjTOP1YzbHoRn9L2cvFB vqoNK+7hyoPBAMTjnyb2AiJtCpPqthC0pSC0oe8oT2gD1xc7NyWxPa/RwSU++d8e9SCCBEnnZXX OX4A9zrY81Gk+qTQWRk6XtYogiatCpCFLDTHZUSVdy2uiYUWL6C0ePs7A07b4iOwQQ4jNiFM9ch rZgd/lTr7WmwowIXtjua2SZLJOdru+WxicaPjk=
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2sm/PApqRNzzOetzXVTCLkKcTD1TULI>
Subject: Re: [L2sm] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8466 (6683)
X-BeenThere: l2sm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Layer Two Virtual Private Network Service Model \(L2SM\)" <l2sm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2sm>, <mailto:l2sm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/l2sm/>
List-Post: <mailto:l2sm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2sm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2sm>, <mailto:l2sm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 08:20:17 -0000

Looks right to me.

Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: L2sm <l2sm-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of RFC Errata System
Sent: 14 September 2021 06:47
To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Cc: l2sm@ietf.org; giuseppe.fioccola@tim.it; xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn;
luay.jalil@verizon.com; bin_wen@comcast.com; mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Subject: [L2sm] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8466 (6683)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8466,
"A YANG Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) Service
Delivery".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6683

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Mohamed Boucadair <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>

Section: 5.10.2.1

Original Text
-------------
   QoS classification rules are handled by "qos-classification-policy".
   qos-classification-policy is an ordered list of rules that match a
   flow or application and set the appropriate target CoS
   (target-class-id).  The user can define the match using a
   more specific flow definition (based on Layer 2 source and
   destination MAC addresses, cos, dscp, cos-id, color-id, etc.).  A
   "color-id" will be assigned to a service frame to identify its QoS
   profile conformance.  A service frame is "green" if it is conformant
   with the "committed" rate of the bandwidth profile.  A service frame
   is "yellow" if it exceeds the "committed" rate but is conformant with
   the "excess" rate of the bandwidth profile.  Finally, a service frame
   is "red" if it is conformant with neither the "committed" rate nor
   the "excess" rate of the bandwidth profile.

Corrected Text
--------------
   QoS classification rules are handled by "qos-classification-policy".
   qos-classification-policy is an ordered list of rules that match a
   flow or application and set the appropriate target CoS
   (target-class-id).  The user can define the match using a
   more specific flow definition (based on Layer 2 source and
   destination MAC addresses, dscp, color-type, etc.).  A
   "color-type" will be assigned to a service frame to identify its QoS
   profile conformance.  A service frame is "green" if it is conformant
   with the "committed" rate of the bandwidth profile.  A service frame
   is "yellow" if it exceeds the "committed" rate but is conformant with
   the "excess" rate of the bandwidth profile.  Finally, a service frame
   is "red" if it is conformant with neither the "committed" rate nor
   the "excess" rate of the bandwidth profile.

Notes
-----
There is no "color-id" under "qos-classification-policy". The text should
refer to "color-type" given that the "qos-classification-policy" substree is
as follows:

        +--rw service
        |  +--rw qos {qos}?
        |  |  +--rw qos-classification-policy
        |  |  |  +--rw rule* [id]
        |  |  |     +--rw id                   string
        |  |  |     +--rw (match-type)?
        |  |  |     |  +--:(match-flow)
        |  |  |     |  |  +--rw match-flow
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw dscp?           inet:dscp
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw dot1q?          uint16
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw pcp?            uint8
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw src-mac?        yang:mac-address
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw dst-mac?        yang:mac-address
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw color-type?     identityref
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw target-sites*
        |  |  |     |  |     |               svc-id {target-sites}?
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw any?            empty
        |  |  |     |  |     +--rw vpn-id?         svc-id
        |  |  |     |  +--:(match-application)
        |  |  |     |     +--rw match-application?   identityref
        |  |  |     +--rw target-class-id?     string

The same applies for "cos" and "cos-id". 

The corrected text uses "color-type" instead of "color-id" and removes "cos"
and "cos-id" from the flow definition examples.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC8466 (draft-ietf-l2sm-l2vpn-service-model-10)
--------------------------------------
Title               : A YANG Data Model for Layer 2 Virtual Private Network
(L2VPN) Service Delivery
Publication Date    : October 2018
Author(s)           : B. Wen, G. Fioccola, Ed., C. Xie, L. Jalil
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : L2VPN Service Model
Area                : Operations and Management
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

_______________________________________________
L2sm mailing list
L2sm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2sm