Re: [mpls] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5036 (5597)

I believe that the original text is correct. The intent is that repeated
setup attempts are delayed at least by 15 seconds and up to a maximum delay
that's at least 2 minutes (the actual maximum is at the discretion of the
implementation).

I agree with Stewart that this is outside an errata scope, and requires a
consensus RFC if a change is warranted.

I've updated Ina's email address. I also removed Bob's old email address,
as he's left Cisco and I don't have an updated address for him.

Cheers,
Andy

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 9:33 AM Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think that technically that is a technical change to the RFC, and so
> is outside the scope of an Errata.
>
> Whatever the original intent, the original text say that it must grow to
> at least 2 minutes. I don't think we can just change it to be a maximum
> of 2 minutes without going through the consensus process with an, albeit
> very short, RFC.
>
> - Stewart
>
>
> On 10/01/2019 10:31, RFC Errata System wrote:
> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5036,
> > "LDP Specification".
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > You may review the report below and at:
> > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5597
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > Type: Editorial
> > Reported by: Ramakrishna Rao DTV <ramakrishnadtv@gmail.com>
> >
> > Section: 2.5.3
> >
> > Original Text
> > -------------
> >     The session establishment setup attempt following a NAK'd
> >     Initialization message MUST be delayed no less than 15 seconds, and
> >     subsequent delays MUST grow to a maximum delay of no less than 2
> >     minutes.  The specific session establishment action that must be
> >     delayed is the attempt to open the session transport connection by
> >     the LSR playing the active role.
> >
> >
> > Corrected Text
> > --------------
> >     The session establishment setup attempt following a NAK'd
> >     Initialization message MUST be delayed no less than 15 seconds, and
> >     subsequent delays MUST grow to a maximum delay of no more than 2
> >     minutes.  The specific session establishment action that must be
> >     delayed is the attempt to open the session transport connection by
> >     the LSR playing the active role.
> >
> >
> > Notes
> > -----
> > In the 3rd line, "less" is changed to "more".
> >
> > The intention is to cap the maximum delay. But the existing text implies
> no cap
> > essentially.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > RFC5036 (draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3036bis-04)
> > --------------------------------------
> > Title               : LDP Specification
> > Publication Date    : October 2007
> > Author(s)           : L. Andersson, Ed., I. Minei, Ed., B. Thomas, Ed.
> > Category            : DRAFT STANDARD
> > Source              : Multiprotocol Label Switching
> > Area                : Routing
> > Stream              : IETF
> > Verifying Party     : IESG
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpls mailing list
> > mpls@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>