[Errata Verified] RFC4762 (4144)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 20 November 2014 14:43 UTC

To: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com, mlasserre@alcatel-lucent.com, vach.kompella@alcatel-lucent.com
Subject: [Errata Verified] RFC4762 (4144)
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20141120144220.C3036180448@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 06:42:20 -0800
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2vpn/0k0lUdSC6jNVCww66Ml0oIDOtqM
Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Precedence: list

The following errata report has been verified for RFC4762,
"Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) Using Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Signaling". 

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4762&eid=4144

--------------------------------------
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported by: Alexander ("Sasha") Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
Date Reported: 2014-10-23
Verified by: Adrian Farrel (IESG)

Section: Appendix A

Original Text
-------------
   In a VPLS, we use a VCID (which, when using the PWid FEC, has been
   substituted with a more general identifier (AGI), to address
   extending the scope of a VPLS) to identify an emulated LAN segment.
   Note that the VCID as specified in [RFC4447] is a service identifier,
   identifying a service emulating a point-to-point virtual circuit.  In
   a VPLS, the VCID is a single service identifier, so it has global
   significance across all PEs involved in the VPLS instance.

Corrected Text
--------------
   In a VPLS, we use a PWID (which, when using the Generalized PW ID 
   FEC, has been substituted with a more general identifier (AGI), 
   to address
   extending the scope of a VPLS) to identify an emulated LAN segment.
   Note that the PWID as specified in [RFC4447] is a service identifier,
   identifying a service emulating a point-to-point virtual circuit.  In
   a VPLS, the PWID is a single service identifier, so it has global
   significance across all PEs involved in the VPLS instance.

Notes
-----
1. The problematic text follows a diagram depicting the PWID FEC (a.k.a. FEC-128) as it appears in RFC 4447. This diagram includes a 32-bit PWID field, but there is no VCID field. Nor is VCID mentioned anywhere in RFC 4447 - it has been used in the original Martini drafts but has then been replaced by PWID. 

2. According to RFC 4447, AGI is used only in the Generalized PW ID FEC (a.k.a. FEC-129) but not in the PWID FEC (a.k.a. FEC-128).

--------------------------------------
RFC4762 (draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-09)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) Using Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Signaling
Publication Date    : January 2007
Author(s)           : M. Lasserre, Ed., V. Kompella, Ed.
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks INT
Area                : Internet
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC4762 (4144) RFC Errata System
[Errata Verified] RFC4762 (4144) RFC Errata System