Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC4762 (4834)

[Prakash Ragunathan <[e-mail]>]

Hi Loa,

The changed looked really fine. This will avoid any unnecessary confusion.
I found similar confusing statements in the same RFC. Will send it as
separate requests.

Thanks,
Prakash R.

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Loa Andersson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 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]
>