Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497)

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Martin, Stewart, Alexander,

You are very well summarizing the very reason why I put it as a note.

So for the Errata I think this is what we should go with:

NEW
---
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in
RFC 2858 [BGP-MP].

When we get to do a 3071bis the second alternative could be used.

/Loa

On 2015-10-14 20:15, Martin Vigoureux wrote:
> Loa,
>
> I think we should respect the timeline.
> I understand that this errata gives the opportunity to reference the
> most up to date RFC, but I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283]
> into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise it could open the door to creating erratas for
> any reference that would have been updated/obsoleted.
> The updates/obsoletes tag enables readers to reach the latest relevant
> document.
>
> -m
>
> Le 14/10/2015 11:13, Loa Andersson a écrit :
>> Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working),
>>
>> I think this errata is
>> - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update
>>    of RFC 3107
>> - second the errata is at the core correct
>> - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text
>>
>> I think it should be:
>>
>> NEW - first alternative
>> -----------------------
>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
>> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in
>> RFC 2858 [BGP-MP].
>>
>> Note:
>> RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation
>> as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the
>> RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text.
>> But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation
>> had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in
>> turn has been updated by RFC 7606.
>>
>> So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will
>> take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text
>> should be:
>>
>> NEW - preferred alternative
>> ---------------------------
>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
>> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in
>> RFC 4760 [BGP-MP].
>>
>> Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference
>> section at the same time.
>>
>> Any opinions?
>>
>> /Loa
>>
>> On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote:
>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107,
>>> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4".
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Type: Technical
>>> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov <[e-mail]>
>>>
>>> Section: 2
>>>
>>> Original Text
>>> -------------
>>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
>>>     using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283].
>>>
>>> Corrected Text
>>> --------------
>>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
>>>     using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP].
>>>
>>> Notes
>>> -----
>>> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document
>>> refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858).
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04)
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Title               : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4
>>> Publication Date    : May 2001
>>> Author(s)           : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen
>>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>>> Source              : Multiprotocol Label Switching
>>> Area                : Routing
>>> Stream              : IETF
>>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>>