Re: [manet] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7181 (4872)
"Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com> Wed, 30 November 2016 10:41 UTC
Return-Path: <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32ACA129F8E for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 02:41:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.127
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.127 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RDNS_NONE=0.793] 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 brxiA7bV6Xmn for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 02:41:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ukmta1.baesystems.com (unknown [20.133.0.55]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93F41129F73 for <manet@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 02:39:56 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,573,1473116400"; d="scan'208";a="135603834"
Received: from unknown (HELO baemasmds016.greenlnk.net) ([10.15.207.101]) by ukmta1.baesystems.com with ESMTP; 30 Nov 2016 10:39:54 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,573,1473116400"; d="scan'208";a="145660411"
Received: from glkxh0001v.greenlnk.net ([10.109.2.32]) by baemasmds016.greenlnk.net with ESMTP; 30 Nov 2016 10:39:54 +0000
Received: from GLKXM0002V.GREENLNK.net ([169.254.5.170]) by GLKXH0001V.GREENLNK.net ([10.109.2.32]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 10:39:54 +0000
From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "T.Clausen@computer.org" <T.Clausen@computer.org>, "philippe.jacquet@alcatel-lucent.com" <philippe.jacquet@alcatel-lucent.com>, "ulrich@herberg.name" <ulrich@herberg.name>, "akatlas@gmail.com" <akatlas@gmail.com>, "db3546@att.com" <db3546@att.com>, "aretana@cisco.com" <aretana@cisco.com>, "sratliff@idirect.net" <sratliff@idirect.net>, "bebemaster@gmail.com" <bebemaster@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7181 (4872)
Thread-Index: AQHSSvPM/lXPfeXFRkyCD8K022wBj6DxVH9g
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 10:39:53 +0000
Message-ID: <B31EEDDDB8ED7E4A93FDF12A4EECD30DA1F26640@GLKXM0002V.GREENLNK.net>
References: <20161130102218.5DD3EB800F3@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20161130102218.5DD3EB800F3@rfc-editor.org>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.109.62.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/nXzIRUpx3MglmKdrixbY0rT0YQs>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 08:12:29 -0800
Cc: "manet@ietf.org" <manet@ietf.org>, "nmalykh@gmail.com" <nmalykh@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [manet] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7181 (4872)
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 10:41:19 -0000
Author writing. Were this erratum to be correct, it would be an editorial change of really minute significance. But in fact it is wrong. The "in" distinguishes the cases of N_orig_addr and an N_neighbor_addr_list. The former is a single address, the latter is a list of addresses. Therefore one looks for the address as the former, or in (the word that should not be deleted) the latter. This erratum must be rejected. (And unlike the previous erratum I handled, which was useful, do we need such trivial editorial nits even if correct? It took me significant time just to find the missing word in the paragraph - for the benefit of others, it's in the seventh line.) -- Christopher Dearlove Senior Principal Engineer BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Laboratories __________________________________________________________________________ T: +44 (0)1245 242194 | E: chris.dearlove@baesystems.com BAE Systems Applied Intelligence, Chelmsford Technology Park, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 8HN. www.baesystems.com/ai BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Limited Registered in England & Wales No: 01337451 Registered Office: Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7YP -----Original Message----- From: RFC Errata System [mailto:rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org] Sent: 30 November 2016 10:22 To: T.Clausen@computer.org; Dearlove, Christopher (UK); philippe.jacquet@alcatel-lucent.com; ulrich@herberg.name; akatlas@gmail.com; db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; sratliff@idirect.net; bebemaster@gmail.com Cc: nmalykh@gmail.com; manet@ietf.org; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7181 (4872) ----------------------! WARNING ! ---------------------- This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an external partner or from the internet. Consider carefully whether you should click on any links, open any attachments or reply. Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages. -------------------------------------------------------- The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7181, "The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol Version 2". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7181&eid=4872 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Nikolai Malykh <nmalykh@gmail.com> Section: 16.2 Original Text ------------- TC messages MAY be generated in response to a change in the information that they are to advertise, indicated by a change in the ANSN in the Neighbor Information Base. In this case, a router MAY send a complete TC message and, if so, MAY restart its TC message schedule. Alternatively, a router MAY send an incomplete TC message with at least the newly advertised network addresses (i.e., not previously, but now, an N_orig_addr or in an N_neighbor_addr_list in a Neighbor Tuple with N_advertised = true or an AL_net_addr) in its Address Blocks, with associated Address Block TLV(s). Note that a router cannot report removal of advertised content using an incomplete TC message. Corrected Text -------------- TC messages MAY be generated in response to a change in the information that they are to advertise, indicated by a change in the ANSN in the Neighbor Information Base. In this case, a router MAY send a complete TC message and, if so, MAY restart its TC message schedule. Alternatively, a router MAY send an incomplete TC message with at least the newly advertised network addresses (i.e., not previously, but now, an N_orig_addr or an N_neighbor_addr_list in a Neighbor Tuple with N_advertised = true or an AL_net_addr) in its Address Blocks, with associated Address Block TLV(s). Note that a router cannot report removal of advertised content using an incomplete TC message. Notes ----- Unnecessary preposition "in" 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. -------------------------------------- RFC7181 (draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-19) -------------------------------------- Title : The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol Version 2 Publication Date : April 2014 Author(s) : T. Clausen, C. Dearlove, P. Jacquet, U. Herberg Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ********************************************************************
- [manet] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7181 (4872) RFC Errata System
- Re: [manet] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7181 (… Dearlove, Christopher (UK)