[OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5185 (3595)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 17 April 2013 10:20 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2734121F8E48 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 03:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.419
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.181, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MCEhv0g0qX9Q for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 03:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72B4D21F86E4 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 03:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id EBCB1B1E002; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 03:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
To: sina@nuovasystems.com, ppsenak@cisco.com, acee@redback.com, aoswal@redback.com, stbryant@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, akr@cisco.com, acee.lindem@ericsson.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20130417101916.EBCB1B1E002@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 03:19:16 -0700
Cc: ospf@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5185 (3595)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ospf>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:20:19 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5185, "OSPF Multi-Area Adjacency". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5185&eid=3595 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Marek Karasek <mkarasek@cisco.com> Section: 4 Original Text ------------- A link-LSA SHOULD NOT be advertised for a multi-area adjacency. The neighbor's IPv6 link local address can be learned in other ways, e.g., it can be extracted from the IPv6 header of Hello packets received over the multi-area adjacency. The neighbor IPv6 link local address is required for the OSPFv3 route next-hop calculation on multi-access networks (refer to Section 3.8.1.1 of [OSPFV3]). Corrected Text -------------- OSPFv3 supports two Address Families (AF), AF IPv6 and AF IPv4, using separate instances [RFC 5338]. The route calculation differs for the IPv4 and IPv6 address families with respect to the next-hop determination. OSPFv3 instances supporting an IPv6 AF SHOULD learn the IPv6 next-hop address from the IPv6 Header source address and SHOULD NOT advertise a Link-LSA for a multi-area adjacency. However, for OSPFv3 instances supporting an IPv4 AF, the next-hop address cannot be learned from the OSPFv3 hellos and require advertisement of the Link-LSA. Hence, OSPFv3 instances supporting an IPv4 AF SHOULD advertise a Link-LSA for the a multi-area adjacency (refer to section 2.5 of [RFC 5838]). If the Link-LSA is not advertised, the OSPFv3 instance MAY learn the IPv4 next-hop address from the Link-LSA advertised on the primary adjacency. Notes ----- RFC5185 describes next-hop calculation which is not applicable to OSPFv3 process supporting AF IPv4 as defined in RFC5838. Errata defines how RFC5838 OSPFv3 process supporting AF IPv4 calculates next-hop address on multi-area interface. Instructions: ------------- This errata 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 (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5185 (draft-ietf-ospf-multi-area-adj-09) -------------------------------------- Title : OSPF Multi-Area Adjacency Publication Date : May 2008 Author(s) : S. Mirtorabi, P. Psenak, A. Lindem, Ed., A. Oswal Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5185 (3595) RFC Errata System