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

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