Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC2328 (5041)

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Tue, 13 June 2017 20:38 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
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 62999126E3A for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:38:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 3jiJmk-jpCLF for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 364C61243F3 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3298; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1497386307; x=1498595907; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=huZcvnTqP8npnF/OK6wEFPVZJHR2IzB4LYBjXx2ItEA=; b=ADYqh5xi1VZpfuf/oJaPqwgwIW9NnId18PmYr4RM3XHG3Wz11x5AiuyV ILx7FUSk3WlEjXiaJMIQphwXp/Y8f92uAglVTJZ1esA0/aovcmw9Z5f2K jBRHKp1IdHqf1+lZBoQJO2/UDfGokvu2m7VChqj9n+aPpiGauMNNQ5dPT Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DfAAC2TEBZ/5FdJa1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg1higQ0Hg26KGJocjVmCESyFeAIagig/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRk?= =?us-ascii?q?GIxFFEAIBCBoCJgICAh8RFRACBAENBYoUAxUQrjeCJoQWAYMcDYN7AQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBHYELhzaDIIE9gRuFJIJhBYlNEYg0i3Y7Ao5phGSCB4V?= =?us-ascii?q?Dij6JF4I1iScBHziBCnQVHoVCgTsBOnaIXYENAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,339,1493683200"; d="scan'208";a="437846609"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Jun 2017 20:38:26 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (xch-rtp-001.cisco.com [64.101.220.141]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v5DKcQWf015811 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:38:26 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com (64.101.220.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 16:38:25 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 16:38:25 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "jmoy@casc.com" <jmoy@casc.com>, "akatlas@gmail.com" <akatlas@gmail.com>, "db3546@att.com" <db3546@att.com>, "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>, "Abhay Roy (akr)" <akr@cisco.com>
CC: "brylant@gmail.com" <brylant@gmail.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC2328 (5041)
Thread-Index: AQHS5ILZjbA11J/NC0GPFck5iE4KSKIjQPIA
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:38:25 +0000
Message-ID: <D565C51D.B30E7%acee@cisco.com>
References: <20170613202244.8D0ACB80EC4@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170613202244.8D0ACB80EC4@rfc-editor.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <5544910F00BF3940A6B0040431995B40@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/D68j7wmI22NZudZw5QKCJUO4FEU>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC2328 (5041)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:38:29 -0000

This editorial errata is correct. Please update it to also correct
instance of “1-Way” to “1-WayReceived” in the text immediately below
figure 13. 
Thanks,
Acee 

On 6/13/17, 4:22 PM, "RFC Errata System" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:

>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328,
>"OSPF Version 2".
>
>--------------------------------------
>You may review the report below and at:
>http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5041
>
>--------------------------------------
>Type: Editorial
>Reported by: Adam Augustyn <brylant@gmail.com>
>
>Section: 10.2
>
>Original Text
>-------------
>1-Way
>    An Hello packet has been received from the neighbor, in
>    which the router is not mentioned.  This indicates that
>    communication with the neighbor is not bidirectional.
>
>Corrected Text
>--------------
>1-WayReceived
>    An Hello packet has been received from the neighbor, in
>    which the router is not mentioned.  This indicates that
>    communication with the neighbor is not bidirectional.
>
>Notes
>-----
>RFC2328 defines The Neighbor state machine and it's states. One of the
>states is defined/named as 1-WayReceived ([Page 95] 10.3.).
>1-WayReceived is also mentioned on page 84 and 98.
>
>Pages 85 and 88 use event 1Way which should be renamed to 1-WayReceived
>for consistency with definition of the state.
>
>[Page 85]
>Event 1-Way forces Init state,
>
>
>[Page 88]
>10.2.  Events causing neighbor state changes
>1-Way
>    An Hello packet has been received from the neighbor, in
>    which the router is not mentioned.  This indicates that
>    communication with the neighbor is not bidirectional.
>
>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.
>
>--------------------------------------
>RFC2328 (no draft string recorded)
>--------------------------------------
>Title               : OSPF Version 2
>Publication Date    : April 1998
>Author(s)           : J. Moy
>Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
>Source              : Open Shortest Path First IGP
>Area                : Routing
>Stream              : IETF
>Verifying Party     : IESG