[Netconf] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6241 (5596)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 09 January 2019 09:05 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A17128766 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 01:05:46 -0800 (PST)
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 nC_OJ2AsCG0l for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 01:05:44 -0800 (PST)
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 999921274D0 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 01:05:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id F28AAB82360; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 01:05:32 -0800 (PST)
To: rob.enns@gmail.com, mbj@tail-f.com, j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, andy@yumaworks.com, ibagdona@gmail.com, warren@kumari.net, kwatsen@juniper.net, mjethanandani@gmail.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: jonathan@hansfords.net, netconf@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20190109090532.F28AAB82360@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 01:05:32 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/DgMQnIB3-S25hyqTxk7A6Ym3T6Q>
Subject: [Netconf] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6241 (5596)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 09:05:46 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6241, "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5596 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Jonathan Hansford <jonathan@hansfords.net> Section: 7.5 Original Text ------------- The duration of the lock is defined as beginning when the lock is acquired and lasting until either the lock is released or the NETCONF session closes. The session closure can be explicitly performed by the client, or implicitly performed by the server based on criteria such as failure of the underlying transport, simple inactivity timeout, or detection of abusive behavior on the part of the client. These criteria are dependent on the implementation and the underlying transport. Corrected Text -------------- The duration of the lock is defined as beginning when the lock is acquired and lasting until either the lock is released or the NETCONF session closes. The session closure can be explicitly performed by the client, or implicitly performed by the server based on criteria such as failure of the underlying transport, simple inactivity timeout, or detection of abusive behavior on the part of the client. These criteria are dependent on the implementation and the underlying transport. Note that a lock associated with a persistent confirmed commit will be released if the NETCONF session closes and, if required, a new lock will have to be acquired. Notes ----- A persistent confirmed commit can survive a session termination, however any lock on that same session cannot. If a new session is established between the client and server, the client will need to acquire new locks if it wishes to protect the ongoing persistent confirmed commit. 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. -------------------------------------- RFC6241 (draft-ietf-netconf-4741bis-10) -------------------------------------- Title : Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) Publication Date : June 2011 Author(s) : R. Enns, Ed., M. Bjorklund, Ed., J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., A. Bierman, Ed. Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Network Configuration Area : Operations and Management Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Netconf] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6241 (55… RFC Errata System
- Re: [Netconf] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6241… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [Netconf] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6241… Jonathan