Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC4762 (4834)

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Folks,

When I started to look at this it looked rather simple, but the
statement section 9.1 does not (necessarily) relate to figure 2.

I wonder if the first paragraph in section 9.1 should be tweaked this
way:

OLD
    PEs that learn remote MAC addresses SHOULD have an aging mechanism to
    remove unused entries associated with a PW label.  This is important
    both for conservation of memory and for administrative purposes.  For
    example, if a customer site A, is shut down, eventually the other PEs
    should unlearn A's MAC address.
NEW
    PEs that learn remote MAC addresses SHOULD have an aging mechanism to
    remove unused entries associated with a PW label.  This is important
    both for conservation of memory and for administrative purposes.  For
    example, if a customer site S, is shut down, eventually the other PEs
    should unlearn the MAC address(es) of this site.

/Loa



On 2016-10-18 20:22, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted 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=4834
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Prakash Ragunathan <[e-mail]>
>
> Section: 9.1
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> For
>    example, if a customer site A, is shut down, eventually the other PEs
>    should unlearn A's MAC address.
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> For
>    example, if customer site A1, is shut down, eventually the other PEs
>    should unlearn A1's MAC address.
>
> Notes
> -----
> customer site name is not mentioned in example. Naming the site (A1) gives clear info than just stating "customer site A".
>
> 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 (IESG)
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> 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
>

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]