Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981)
Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com> Wed, 28 September 2011 16:01 UTC
Return-Path: <acee.lindem@ericsson.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 025F021F8CA2 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.552
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.047, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Ebd+hFEKqwrU for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5AED21F8CA0 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:01:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8SG45is026970; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:04:07 -0500
Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.60]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:04:00 -0400
From: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
To: "stbryant@cisco.com" <stbryant@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:03:57 -0400
Thread-Topic: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981)
Thread-Index: Acx9+DugXzgSywzITIus+1M/URjVzQ==
Message-ID: <CA63764E-C697-4B21-B144-08367A4E4954@ericsson.com>
References: <20110928143401.C54F198C260@rfc-editor.org> <48B7CFFE-2B7E-4997-B94A-0520468B8BE3@ericsson.com> <4E8340D4.5070406@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E8340D4.5070406@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com" <alex.zinin@alcatel-lucent.com>, "gcote@awardsolutions.com" <gcote@awardsolutions.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>, "none@rfc-editor.org" <none@rfc-editor.org>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981)
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, 28 Sep 2011 16:01:38 -0000
Hi Stewart, On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote: > Acee > > Do you think that anyone will be seriously confused > or make an implementation error over this? No. > > This looks like an erratum that should be verified > as correct (because it is), but set aside for fixing > in the next release - i.e. the doc should not > instruct the reader to go to the errata page to > understand the doc. Agreed. This would apply to both Errata. Thanks, Acee > > Stewart > > > On 28/09/2011 16:37, Acee Lindem wrote: >> Steward, Adrian, >> Approved for state change to verified. This is something I'm going to add to my list of things to check (especially in Bis documents). >> Thanks, >> Acee >> On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:34 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: >> >>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5250, >>> "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option". >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> You may review the report below and at: >>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5250&eid=2981 >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Type: Editorial >>> Reported by: Gary Cote<gcote@awardsolutions.com> >>> >>> Section: 3 >>> >>> Original Text >>> ------------- >>> Section 7 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >>> >>> Corrected Text >>> -------------- >>> Section 9 describes Opaque type allocation and assignment. >>> >>> Notes >>> ----- >>> Section 7 was the "IANA Considerations" section in the previous RFC, 2370. >>> IANA Considerations are included in Section 9 of this document. >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> RFC5250 (draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05) >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Title : The OSPF Opaque LSA Option >>> Publication Date : July 2008 >>> Author(s) : L. Berger, I. Bryskin, A. Zinin, R. Coltun >>> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >>> Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP >>> Area : Routing >>> Stream : IETF >>> Verifying Party : IESG >> > > > -- > For corporate legal information go to: > > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html > >
- [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2981) RFC Errata System
- Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2… Acee Lindem
- Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [OSPF] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5250 (2… Acee Lindem