[mpls] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7307 (5145)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Thu, 05 October 2017 17:39 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376FD132924 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MDke-eu-ZXeQ for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84A181342EF for <mpls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 29C59B80E0E; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
To: quintin.zhao@huawei.com, skraza@cisco.com, czhou@cisco.com, lufang@microsoft.com, lilianyuan@chinamobile.com, daniel@olddog.co.uk, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, swallow.ietf@gmail.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: sandy@tislabs.com, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20171005173926.29C59B80E0E@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/Yl30rvOdef__RVRlf8-SvOASxgc>
Subject: [mpls] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7307 (5145)
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 05 Oct 2017 17:39:34 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7307,
"LDP Extensions for Multi-Topology".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5145

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Sandra Murphy <sandy@tislabs.com>

Section: 4.3.2

Original Text
-------------
   The format of this sub-TLV is similar to the LDP IPv4 FEC sub-TLV as
   defined in [RFC4379].  In addition to "IPv4 prefix" and "Prefix
   Length" fields, this new sub-TLV also specifies the MT-ID (Multi-
   Topology ID).  The Length for this sub-TLV is 5.

Corrected Text
--------------
   The format of the MT LDP IPv4 prefix sub-TLV (type 31) is similar to
   the LDP IPv4 prefix sub-TLV (type 1) as defined in [RFC4379].  In
   addition to the "IPv4 prefix" and "Prefix Length" fields already
   defined in the LDP IPv4 prefix sub-TLV, the new MT LDP IPv4 prefix
   sub-TLV also specifies the MT-ID (Multi-Topology ID) field.  While
   the length of the LDP IPv4 prefix sub-TLV is 5 (and does not include
   the trailing MBZ bytes), the length of this new MT LDP IPv6 prefix 
   sub-TLV is 8 (and does include the internal MBZ byte).

Notes
-----
The original text uses "this sub-TLV" in ways that can be ambiguous. In particular, the final sentence "The Length for this sub-TLV is 5." is incorrect if "this sub-TLV" refers to the topic of the section, i.e., "MT LDP IPv4 FEC Sub-TLV", but is correct if "this sub-TLV" refers to the LDP IPv4 prefix sub-TLV defined in RFC4379/RFC8029. The revised text is suggested to remove the ambiguities. Adrian Farrell provided the bulk of the suggested revisions.

In addition, the sub-TLV names are changed to match the names that were registered in the IANA registry, to aid those trying to find the registry entries.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC7307 (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-multi-topology-12)
--------------------------------------
Title               : LDP Extensions for Multi-Topology
Publication Date    : July 2014
Author(s)           : Q. Zhao, K. Raza, C. Zhou, L. Fang, L. Li, D. King
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Multiprotocol Label Switching
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG