[mpls] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8223 (5584)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 27 December 2018 04:52 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3FDA128B01 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:52:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qpldbdKw_TQe for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:52:25 -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 5284012894E for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:52:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 91CF2B82105; Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:52:05 -0800 (PST)
To: sesale@juniper.net, rtorvi@juniper.net, luay.jalil@verizon.com, uma.chunduri@huawei.com, skraza@cisco.com, db3546@att.com, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, loa@pi.nu, n.leymann@telekom.de
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: jkbhardwaj@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20181227045205.91CF2B82105@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:52:05 -0800 (PST)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/X7QYeHGC6AJtZXi4suvARqmb1HI>
Subject: [mpls] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8223 (5584)
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 04:52:30 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8223,
"Application-Aware Targeted LDP".

You may review the report below and at:

Type: Editorial
Reported by: Jayant Bhardwaj <jkbhardwaj@gmail.com>;

Section: 2.3.2

Original Text
1. The S-bit of the TAC is set to 1 or 0 to advertise or withdraw it.

Corrected Text
1. The E-bit of the TAC is set to 1 or 0 to advertise or withdraw it.

My understanding of this RFC suggests that in order to Advertize or Withdraw TAC , the bit E in TAC is used. In Point # 1 of section 2.3.2, it is mentioned that bit S is used. Looks this is Editorial mistake.

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. 

RFC8223 (draft-ietf-mpls-app-aware-tldp-09)
Title               : Application-Aware Targeted LDP
Publication Date    : August 2017
Author(s)           : S. Esale, R. Torvi, L. Jalil, U. Chunduri, K. Raza
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Multiprotocol Label Switching
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG