[mpls] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8287 (6101)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 13 April 2020 11:17 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 C62963A1415 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 04:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 MEkXXAsAZSrS for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 04:17:35 -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 7CD7B3A1413 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 04:17:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 3C7F4F40721; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 04:17:18 -0700 (PDT)
To: naikumar@cisco.com, cpignata@cisco.com, swallow.ietf@gmail.com, nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com, sriganeshkini@gmail.com, mach.chen@huawei.com, db3546@att.com, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, loa@pi.nu, n.leymann@telekom.de, tsaad.net@gmail.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: alexander.vainshtein@ecitele.com, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20200413111718.3C7F4F40721@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 04:17:18 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/ZnoybBBl5Z7AwZvovGYAeD5KW8Y>
Subject: [mpls] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8287 (6101)
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: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 11:17:37 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8287,
"Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6101

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Alexander ("Sasha") Vainshtein <alexander.vainshtein@ecitele.com>

Section: 7.2

Original Text
-------------
   The network node that advertised the Node Segment ID is responsible
   for generating a FEC Stack Change sub-TLV with the Post Office
   Protocol (POP) operation type for the Node Segment ID, regardless of
   whether or not Penultimate Hop Popping (PHP) is enabled.


Corrected Text
--------------
   The network node that advertised the Node Segment ID is responsible
   for generating a FEC Stack Change sub-TLV with the   POP) operation type for 
   the Node Segment ID, regardless of whether or not Penultimate Hop Popping 
   (PHP) is enabled.


Notes
-----
Expansion of POP to "Post Office Protocol" in the context of this document is wrong.

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. 

--------------------------------------
RFC8287 (draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-13)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing (SR) IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifiers (SIDs) with MPLS Data Planes
Publication Date    : December 2017
Author(s)           : N. Kumar, Ed., C. Pignataro, Ed., G. Swallow, N. Akiya, S. Kini, M. Chen
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Multiprotocol Label Switching
Area                : Routing
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG