Re: [Mip4] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5454 (1719)

George Tsirtsis <tsirtsis@googlemail.com> Mon, 16 March 2009 12:55 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=BlQ4uA6hOppHw41tuTT2uL7iaC/EK4v+8vpjE+niNnWZ5kBYu6UbrvX8bDuTf/LzyF 8tSWKfRQnxWsV/2MgzPoNirnr23P84bZk7aawH3lMI7a5O6onRaqpcTRLTryOVw0M8Sp q/MaMF4t7HoU6lWSxg7bzrRWBYy/ljg4AgjOM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <200903151832.n2FIW67D014841@boreas.isi.edu>
References: <200903151832.n2FIW67D014841@boreas.isi.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 08:55:49 -0400
Message-ID: <d3886a520903160555h24a6b88ekd789c2f6fedd7216@mail.gmail.com>
From: George Tsirtsis <tsirtsis@googlemail.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: ah@tr-sys.de, hesham@elevatemobile.com, pete.mccann@motorola.com, rdroms@cisco.com, mip4@ietf.org, jari.arkko@piuha.net, vpark@qualcomm.com, townsley@cisco.com, henrik@levkowetz.com
Subject: Re: [Mip4] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5454 (1719)
Precedence: list

Personally I do not see a problem here but I am not against the
proposed changed  if others think the change makes the text clearer.

George

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 2:32 PM, RFC Errata System
<rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5454,
> "Dual-Stack Mobile IPv4".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5454&eid=1719
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Alfred Hoenes <ah@TR-Sys.de>
>
> Section: 2.2, pg.7
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>   The following values are defined for use as a Code value in the above
>   extension:
>
> |     0 registration accepted, IPv6 to be tunneled to HoA
>
> |     1 registration accepted, IPv6 to be tunneled to CoA
>
>      8 registration rejected, reason unspecified
>
>      9 registration rejected, administratively prohibited
>
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>   The following values are defined for use as a Code value in the above
>   extension:
>
> |     0 registration accepted, IPv6 will be tunneled to HoA
>
> |     1 registration accepted, IPv6 will be tunneled to CoA
>
>      8 registration rejected, reason unspecified
>
>      9 registration rejected, administratively prohibited
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> Rationale: The extension described in this section is sent
> from the Home Agent to the Mobile Node and reflects the decisions
> made by the Home Agent. "to be tunnelled" could be misunderstood;
> the text should better be stated as a confirmation; hence s/to/will/.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This errata 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC5454 (draft-ietf-mip4-dsmipv4-10)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Dual-Stack Mobile IPv4
> Publication Date    : March 2009
> Author(s)           : G. Tsirtsis, V. Park, H. Soliman
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Mobility for IPv4
> Area                : Internet
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>

[Mip4] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5454 (1719) RFC Errata System
Re: [Mip4] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5454 (1… George Tsirtsis