[L2sm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8466 (6699)
Alice Russo <arusso@amsl.com> Fri, 01 October 2021 16:10 UTC
Return-Path: <arusso@amsl.com>
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 AA0C13A0D16; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 09:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 SdJeCRY9vuOt; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 09:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c8a.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A51873A0D60; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 09:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E49428B4E5; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 09:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lTZie2dk5Nc9; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 09:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.4.33] (c-24-17-19-210.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [24.17.19.210]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F1794237BF8; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 09:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Alice Russo <arusso@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20211001081755.35436F40772@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2021 09:09:41 -0700
Cc: ops-ads@ietf.org, bin_wen@comcast.com, giuseppe.fioccola@tim.it, xiechf.bri@chinatelecom.cn, luay.jalil@verizon.com, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com, l2sm@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <36F21567-69D8-4AF7-803B-A2DBD2DF82A6@amsl.com>
References: <20211001081755.35436F40772@rfc-editor.org>
To: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2sm/wRbW8QjNlEHo744h5Piw7M1wxX4>
Subject: [L2sm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8466 (6699)
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: Fri, 01 Oct 2021 16:10:16 -0000
FYI, in this report, the RFC number has been corrected from RFC 8644 to RFC 8466. Please see below for details. RFC Editor/ar > On Oct 1, 2021, at 1:17 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC 8466, "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/eid6699 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Mohamed Boucadair <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> > > Section: 8 > > Original Text > ------------- > container lacp { > if-feature "lacp"; > leaf enabled { > type boolean; > default "false"; > description > "LACP on/off. By default, LACP is disabled."; > } > leaf mode { > type neg-mode; > description > "LACP mode. LACP modes have active mode and > passive mode ('false'). 'Active mode' means > initiating the auto-speed negotiation and > trying to form an Ethernet channel with the > other end. 'Passive mode' means not initiating > the negotiation but responding to LACP packets > initiated by the other end (e.g., full duplex > or half duplex)."; > } > > > > Corrected Text > -------------- > > container lacp { > if-feature "lacp"; > leaf enabled { > type boolean; > default "false"; > description > "LACP on/off. By default, LACP is disabled."; > } > leaf mode { > type identityref { > base lacp-mode; > } > description > "LACP mode. LACP modes have active mode and > passive mode ('false'). 'Active mode' means > initiating the auto-speed negotiation and > trying to form an Ethernet channel with the > other end. 'Passive mode' means not initiating > the negotiation but responding to LACP packets > initiated by the other end (e.g., full duplex > or half duplex)."; > } > > > Also, make this change: > > OLD: > > | +--rw lag-interfaces {lag-interface}? > | | +--rw lag-interface* [index] > | | +--rw index string > | | +--rw lacp {lacp}? > | | +--rw enabled? boolean > | | +--rw mode? neg-mode > > NEW: > > | +--rw lag-interfaces {lag-interface}? > | | +--rw lag-interface* [index] > | | +--rw index string > | | +--rw lacp {lacp}? > | | +--rw enabled? boolean > | | +--rw mode? identityref > > > Notes > ----- > The LACP mode can be set to active or passive, which is not what neg-mode is supposed to cover. lacp-mode identity should be used, instead. > > 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 : Standards Track Source : L2VPN Service Model Area : Operations and Management > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG >