[Lsr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (5611)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Tue, 22 January 2019 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEBC1310E7 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4R3ShxRGz5iN for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11D14131072 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id CE3B0B80E83; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:10 -0800 (PST)
To: jmoy@casc.com, db3546@att.com, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, akr@cisco.com, acee@cisco.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: mandru@versa-networks.com, lsr@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20190122200910.CE3B0B80E83@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:09:10 -0800 (PST)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/ACVzdktoiFbIcMyQck1RCGn50es>
Subject: [Lsr] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (5611)
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 20:09:22 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328,
"OSPF Version 2".

You may review the report below and at:

Type: Technical
Reported by: Anil Chaitanya Mandru <mandru@versa-networks.com>;

Section: 16.1 (4)

Original Text
In this case, the current routing table entry
            should be overwritten if and only if the newly found path is
            just as short and the current routing table entry's Link
            State Origin has a smaller Link State ID than the newly
            added vertex' LSA.

Corrected Text
In this case, if the newly found path is just as short, 
then both the paths should be added to the routing table. 

If the newly found path is just as short then both the paths should be considered for ECMP. Why should the smaller Link State ID path overwrite the current one even if the paths are equi distant?

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. 

RFC2328 (no draft string recorded)
Title               : OSPF Version 2
Publication Date    : April 1998
Author(s)           : J. Moy
Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
Source              : Open Shortest Path First IGP
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG